图像

像历史学家一样阅读

Reading Like a Historian

初中和高中历史课堂的识字教学

Teaching Literacy in Middle and High School History Classrooms

与共同核心国家标准保持一致

ALIGNED WITH COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS

像历史学家一样阅读

Reading Like a Historian

初中和高中历史课堂的识字教学

Teaching Literacy in Middle and High School History Classrooms

与共同核心国家标准保持一致

ALIGNED WITH COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS

萨姆·温伯格、黛西·马丁和昌西·蒙特-萨诺

Sam Wineburg, Daisy Martin, and Chauncey Monte-Sano

图像



哥伦比亚大学师范学院

纽约和伦敦

Teachers College

Columbia University

New York and London

由教师学院出版社出版,1234 阿姆斯特丹大道,纽约,NY 10027

Published by Teachers College Press, 1234 Amsterdam Avenue, New York, NY 10027

版权所有 © 2013 哥伦比亚大学师范学院

Copyright © 2013 by Teachers College, Columbia University

版权所有。未经出版商许可,不得以任何形式或任何手段(电子或机械)复制或传播本出版物的任何部分,包括复印或任何信息存储和检索系统。

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission from the publisher.

美国国会图书馆出版数据编目

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

温堡,塞缪尔·S.

Wineburg, Samuel S.

像历史学家一样阅读:在初中和高中历史课堂上教授识字/Sam Wineberg、Daisy Martin 和 Chauncey Monte-Sano。

Reading like a historian: teaching literacy in middle and high school history classrooms / Sam Wineberg, Daisy Martin, and Chauncey Monte-Sano.

p。厘米。

p. cm.

“符合共同核心国家标准。”

“Aligned with common core state standards.”

包括参考书目和索引。

Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN:978-0-8077-5403-0(pk.)

ISBN: 978-0-8077-5403-0 (pbk.)

1.雷丁(中学)——美国。2. 雷丁(中学)——美国。3. 中学教学——美国。4.高中教学——美国。I. 马丁,黛西,1962–II。蒙特萨诺,昌西。三.标题。

1. Reading (Middle school)—United States. 2. Reading (Secondary)—United States. 3. Middle school teaching—United States. 4. High school teaching—United States. I. Martin, Daisy, 1962– II. Monte-Sano, Chauncey. III. Title.

LB1632.W565 2012

LB1632.W565 2012

418'.40712—dc23

418’.40712—dc23

2012035684

2012035684

ISBN:978-0-8077-5403-0(纸质)

ISBN: 978-0-8077-5403-0 (paper)

电子 ISBN:978-0-8077-7237-9

e-ISBN: 978-0-8077-7237-9

致雷切尔·洛坦

To Rachel Lotan

为了她的支持,为了她的想象力

for her support, for her imagination

内容

Contents

2.“挺身而出”还是逃离现场?

2.  “Standing Tall” or Fleeing the Scene?

雅各布·道格拉斯和山姆·温伯格

Jacob Douglas and Sam Wineburg

介绍

Introduction

加布里埃尔·普罗瑟 (Gabriel Prosser) 出生于光荣的 1776 年,但死时并不光彩。普罗瑟在弗吉尼亚州里士满煽动奴隶起义,但在实施之前就被捕了。1800 年 10 月 31 日,他的尸体悬挂在里士满的绞刑架上。

Born in the glorious year of 1776, Gabriel Prosser died an inglorious death. Prosser fomented a slave revolt in Richmond, Virginia, but was apprehended before he could carry it out. On October 31, 1800, his body dangled from Richmond’s gallows.

本杰明·吉特洛出生于 1891 年,编辑了一份名为《革命时代》的时事通讯,并写了一本名为《左翼宣言》的书。1920 年 2 月,吉特洛因“鼓吹推翻政府”而根据纽约无政府状态刑事法被定罪。1他向最高法院上诉。他输了。

Benjamin Gitlow, born in 1891, edited a newsletter called The Revolutionary Age and wrote a book called The Left Wing Manifesto. In February 1920 Gitlow was convicted under New York’s Criminal Anarchy Law for “advocating the overthrow of the government.”1 He appealed his case to the Supreme Court. He lost.

除非你对被挫败的奴隶起义或 1920 年代的社会主义者特别感兴趣,否则你很可能既没有听说过加布里埃尔·普罗瑟,也没有听说过本杰明·吉特洛——即使你教历史。然而,这两个数字都出现在 2006 年国家教育进步评估(“国家成绩单”)中的名字、日期和主题中,该测试旨在衡量对所有美国人“至关重要”的历史。2

Unless you have a special interest in foiled slave revolts or socialists of the 1920s, odds are that you’ve heard of neither Gabriel Prosser nor Benjamin Gitlow—even if you teach history. Yet both figures appear among the names, dates, and themes jammed into the 2006 National Assessment of Educational Progress (“The Nation’s Report Card”), a test designed to measure the history deemed “essential” to all Americans.2

对于我们太多的学生来说,历史已经成为普罗瑟和吉特洛的无休止的游行。面对“历史思维”这样的术语,许多人都摸不着头脑,被所谓的“历史”和“思维”之间的联系所困扰,这有什么奇怪的吗?老师们在比洛杉矶电话簿还厚的标准文档中感到震惊,他们发现自己在教授所有这些信息时感到沮丧,而学生在试图记住这些信息时却感到沮丧。

For too many of our students, history has become an endless procession of Prossers and Gitlows. Is it any wonder that faced with a term like “historical thinking,” many scratch their heads, stumped by an alleged connection between “history” and “thinking”? And teachers, staggering under standards documents thicker than the Los Angeles phone book, find themselves as frustrated trying to teach all of this information as their students are trying to retain it.

你手中的这本书提供了一种替代方法,避免了向学生传授很快就会消失的事实的恶性循环。事实对于历史理解至关重要,但只有一种方法可以让它们在记忆中扎根:通过让学生参与历史问题来掌握事实,这些问题激发了他们的好奇心,让他们热衷于寻求答案。是 10 岁的马托卡(世界各地都称为波卡洪塔斯)将约翰·史密斯船长从致命的危险中拯救出来,还是史密斯灵活想象力的虚构,一个辛辣的故事,旨在促进他 1624 年出版的《通史》的图书销量。弗吉尼亚州、新英格兰和夏季群岛第一章)?亚伯拉罕·林肯是种族主义者吗?依靠。种族主义是一种不受时间和地点影响的飘逸品质,还是所有历史判断,尤其是道德判断,都受到环境和传统智慧的制约(第三章)?联邦政策是否导致了沙尘暴危机?或者真正的危机是由傲慢引起的,即相信有了新技术,人类就可以免受大自然波动的影响(第6章)?每个问题都会让我们回到最初的来源,以提出没有简单答案的论点。每个问题都要求我们整理事实来论证我们的观点。但与问题无关的事实并不能构成历史理解,就像脖子上挂着 AK-47 的游荡青少年不能构成一支军队一样。

The book you are holding offers an alternative to the vicious cycle of teaching students facts that will soon evaporate into thin air. Facts are crucial to historical understanding, but there’s only one way for them to take root in memory: Facts are mastered by engaging students in historical questions that spark their curiosity and make them passionate about seeking answers. Did 10-year-old Matoaka, known to the rest of the world as Pocahontas, save Captain John Smith from mortal danger, or was this a figment of Smith’s supple imagination, a spicy tale designed to boost book sales for his 1624 Generall Historie of Virginia, New England & the Summer Isles (Chapter 1)? Was Abraham Lincoln a racist? Depends. Is racism an ethereal quality unaffected by time and place, or are all historical judgments, particularly moral ones, conditioned by circumstance and conventional wisdom (Chapter 3)? Did Federal policy lead to the Dust Bowl crisis? Or was the real crisis caused by arrogance, the belief that armed with new technologies, human beings were immune to the fluctuations of Mother Nature (Chapter 6)? Each question sends us back to the original sources to formulate arguments that admit no easy answer. Each question requires us to marshal facts to argue our case. But facts isolated from the questions that give them meaning no more constitute historical understanding than bands of roving teenagers with AK-47s slung around their necks constitute an army.

在一个“我在互联网上找到的”伪装成知识的时代,历史是对抗知识上的草率的重要平衡力量。当一段从德黑兰手机上传的视频在半秒内到达旧金山时,历史提醒我们从基本问题开始:谁发送的?可以信任吗?Flip视频错过了哪个角度?在博客圈时代,不乏告诉学生思考什么的力量。今天的学生在成堆的信息下喘不过气来,并且从未如此需要如何理解这一切。这就是像历史学家一样阅读的由来。

In an age where “I found it on the Internet” masquerades as knowledge, history serves as a vital counter-weight to intellectual sloppiness. When a video uploaded from a cell phone in Tehran reaches San Francisco in half a second, history reminds us to start with basic questions: Who sent it? Can it be trusted? What angle did the Flip video miss? In the era of the blogosphere, there’s no shortage of forces telling students what to think. Today’s students gasp for air beneath mounds of information, and have never been in greater need of ways to make sense of it all. This is where Reading Like a Historian comes in.

乍一看,像历史学家一样阅读当真正成为职业历史学家的学生如此之少时,这似乎有点多余。但这正是重点。由于很少有学生在高中之后继续学习历史,因此他们在初中和高中社会研究课程中学习像历史学家一样阅读至关重要。历史学家已经开发出强大的阅读方式,使他们能够看到模式,理解矛盾,并在其他人迷失在细节森林中并沮丧地举手时提出合理的解释。历史思维研究人员将这些认识方式提炼为实践,可以教授给各个级别的学生。我们在这里讨论的不是一些在档案馆工作的深奥程序。相当,每次我们打开福克斯新闻或微软全国广播公司(MSNBC)时都会遇到我们。简而言之,像历史学家一样阅读所培养的技能为公民提供了重要的工具。

At first glance, Reading Like a Historian might seem like a frill when so few students actually go on to become professional historians. But that’s precisely the point. Because so few students pursue historical study beyond high school, it is crucial that they learn to read like historians in their middle and high school social studies classes. Historians have developed powerful ways of reading that allow them to see patterns, make sense of contradictions, and formulate reasoned interpretations when others get lost in the forest of detail and throw up their hands in frustration. Researchers of historical thinking have distilled these ways of knowing into practices that can be taught to students at all levels. We’re not talking here about some esoteric procedure for working in an archive. Rather, the practices historians have developed can be used to make sense of the conflicting voices that confront us every time we turn on Fox News or MSNBC. Put simply, the skills cultivated by Reading Like a Historian provide essential tools for citizenship.

考虑一下历史学家和高中生处理原始文献的方式之间的差异。许多学生,甚至是我们最好的读者中的一些人,都会从页面顶部的第一个单词开始阅读,并以最后一个单词结束阅读。文档末尾的归属很少受到关注或完全被忽略。另一方面,历史学家在最后开始撰写一份文件,通过来源它。他们扫视前几个单词以确定其方向,但随后立即跳到文档的底部,放大其归属。谁写了这个源代码以及何时写的?是日记吗?通过《信息自由法》获得的备忘录?泄露的电子邮件?作者是否有第一手资料,还是道听途说?甚至在研究文件的实质内容之前,历史学家就已经列出了一系列问题,这些问题创建了一个心理框架来悬挂接下来的细节。最重要的是,信息来源将阅读行为从被动接受转变为积极而热情的询问。对于历史学家来说,阅读的行为不是收集毫无生气的信息并在测试中重复,而是与人进行激烈的对话。

Consider the differences between how historians and high school students approach primary source documents. Many students, even some of our best readers, start with the first word at the top of a page and end their reading with the last. The attribution at the document’s end receives scant attention or is ignored altogether. Historians, on the other hand, begin a document at the end, by sourcing it. They glance at the first couple of words to get their bearings, but then dart immediately to the document’s bottom, zooming in on its attribution. Who wrote this source and when? Is it a diary entry? A memo obtained through the Freedom of Information Act? A leaked e-mail? Is the author in a position to know first-hand, or is this account based on hearsay? Even before approaching a document’s substance, historians have formed a list of questions that create a mental framework to hang the details that follow. Most important, sourcing transforms the act of reading from passive reception to an engaged and passionate interrogation. For historians, the act of reading is not about gathering lifeless information to repeat on a test, but engaging a human source in spirited conversation.

考虑像历史学家一样阅读的第二个支柱:情境化的实践——事件必须发生在地点和时间才能被正确理解的概念。面对亚伯拉罕·林肯的声明,即他“无意在白人和黑人之间引入政治和社会平等”(第3 章),许多学生难以置信地不寒而栗,或者得出结论,他们所学到的关于第 16 任总统的知识属于与老师告诉他们的其他谎言一起垃圾。

Consider a second pillar of Reading Like a Historian: the practice of contextualization—the notion that events must be located in place and time to be properly understood. Faced with Abraham Lincoln’s statement that he had “no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and black races” (Chapter 3), many students shudder in disbelief or conclude that what they’ve been taught about the 16th president belongs in the trash with the other lies their teachers told them.

但历史学家——即使是那些对内战知之甚少的人——却从不同的地方开始。他们不是提出结论,而是从问题开始。林肯这句话的背景是什么?(与史蒂芬·A·道格拉斯(Stephen A. Douglas)就竞争激烈的参议员席位进行辩论。)这些话是在何时何地说出来的?(1858 年 9 月 22 日,在反黑人情绪的温床伊利诺伊州渥太华。) 观众都是些什么人?(那些主要支持道格拉斯但怀疑林肯的人。)正如语言艺术课上的学生要学习明喻和头韵一样,历史系的学生也必须学习如何寻找历史作者并将其情境化历史文献。当学生离开我们的课堂时,他们每次打开浏览器阅读每日新闻时都可以练习这些技能。

But historians—even those who know little about the Civil War—start from a different place. Instead of issuing conclusions, they begin with questions. What was the context for Lincoln’s words? (A debate with Stephen A. Douglas for a fiercely contested senatorial seat.) When and where were these words uttered? (On September 22, 1858, in Ottawa, Illinois, a hotbed of anti-Black sentiment.) What kind of people made up the audience? (Those largely supportive of Douglas and suspicious of Lincoln.) Just as students in Language Arts class are taught about similes and alliteration, so history students must be taught to source historical authors and to contextualize historical documents. When they leave our classes, students get to practice these skills every time they open their browsers to read the daily news.

来源和情境化是“像历史学家一样阅读”的核心,也是阅读专家在提到特定领域读写能力时所指的意思。特定领域的素养是新的共同核心国家标准(CCSS)的基础,这里采取的方法与这一重点是一致的。3共同核心强调熟练的阅读和写作需要“了解每个学科的规范和惯例”,并敦促教师培养学生在每个领域“评估复杂论点的能力”。4这种重点的转变是一个值得欢迎的变化,它改变了一种有缺陷的观念,即批判性思维是一个凌驾于所有知识领域之上的单一结构。根据共同核心的作者的说法,学校科目不仅仅是大量信息。它们构成了不同的思维方式,每种方式都有自己的工具来构建论据和建立主张。例如,历史/社会研究素养阅读标准反映了本书材料旨在发展的历史思维的各个方面。(我们将 CCSS 的这一部分包含在附录中。我们还在每章末尾的教学场景中标识了指向各个标准的链接 - 查找此处显示的 CCSS 图标,每个图标都附有指示相关年级范围的数字和标准。)通过强调特定领域素养的各个方面,

Sourcing and contextualization are central to Reading Like a Historian and are what reading specialists mean when they refer to domain-specific literacy. Domain-specific literacy is at the foundation of the new Common Core State Standards (CCSS), and the approach taken here is consistent with that focus.3 The Common Core emphasizes that skilled reading and writing requires “the appreciation of the norms and conventions of each discipline,” and urges teachers to cultivate among students “the capacity to evaluate intricate arguments” in each domain.4 This shift in emphasis is a welcome change from the flawed notion that critical thinking is a single construct soaring high above all domains of knowledge. According to the Common Core’s authors, school subjects are more than masses of information. They constitute distinct ways of thinking, each with its own tools for framing arguments and establishing claims. For example, the Reading Standards for Literacy in History/Social Studies reflect aspects of historical thinking that the materials in this book aim to develop. (We include this section of the CCSS in the Appendix. We also identify links to individual standards in the Teaching Scenarios at the end of each chapter—look for the CCSS icon shown here, each icon is accompanied by numbers indicating the relevant grade-band and standard.) By emphasizing aspects of domain-specific literacy, teachers help students prepare for the rigors they’ll face in college.


中国社会科学院

CCSS


例如,考虑一个让许多学生感到困惑的术语:探究。学生们跨学科听到这个术语,但探究的细微差别很少有解释过。在科学课上,学生们进行探究,改变光和水的量对植物生长的影响,并绘制出几轮实验操作变化的影响。但历史不允许这样的实验。过去留给我们的都是零散的碎片,而这些碎片所揭示的内容往往含糊得令人发狂。我们的工作——事实上,我们唯一的手段——就是在创作过程中将碎片拼凑起来。即便如此,当谈到重大问题时——美国革命真的是革命性的吗?大屠杀是德国独有的事件,还是2000年欧洲文明的产物?是什么导致了苏联的解体?——我们无法确定(只需询问两位不同的历史学家即可)。在数学中,几何证明可以证明数学家是在加尔各答还是在卡森城辛勤工作,数学思维的标志是它追求超越空间和时间。但在历史中,空间和时间是学科推理的指路明灯。这就是为什么教育工作者可能会考虑采用另一个国家的数学书籍,但绝不会考虑为历史这样做。查询不是通用的。历史探究的过程受到背景、地点、视角和时代精神的约束。共同核心强调学科知识的这些独特方面,并强调需要明确向学生传授这些知识。本书向您展示了如何做到这一点。

Consider, for example, a term that confuses many students: inquiry. Students hear the term across subjects, but the nuances of inquiry are rarely if ever explained. In a science class, students engage in inquiries in which they vary amounts of light and water on plant growth, charting the effects of variations in rounds of experimental manipulation. But history allows no such experimentation. The past bequeaths to us scattered fragments that are often maddeningly ambiguous about what they disclose. Our job—in fact, our only recourse—is to piece together fragments in an act of creation. Even then, when it comes to big questions—Was the American Revolution truly revolutionary? Was the Holocaust a uniquely German event, or an outgrowth of 2000 years of European civilization? What caused the dissolution of the Soviet Union?—certainty eludes us (just ask two different historians). In math, a geometrical proof holds up whether the mathematician toiled in Calcutta or in Carson City, as the hallmark of mathematical thinking is its quest to rise above space and time. But in history, space and time are the guiding lights of disciplinary reasoning. This is the reason why educators might consider adopting another nation’s math books but would never entertain doing so for history. Inquiry is not generic. The processes of historical inquiry are bound by context, place, perspective, and zeitgeist. The Common Core underscores these unique aspects of disciplinary knowledge, and emphasizes that students need to be explicitly taught about them. This book shows you how to do so.

我们的每一章都会向您展示如何在课堂上应用《像历史学家一样阅读》的各个方面。我们的八章每一章都围绕美国历史上的一个历史问题来组织,从探索和殖民和詹姆斯敦事件以及以古巴导弹危机结束的事件(见表 I.1)。显然,这么长的书不可能涵盖课程中的每个主题。但我们能做的是让您练习在关键事件中使用这种方法,并为您提供将这些实践扩展到其他主题的模型。每一章都是独立的。但您也会注意到,我们一开始介绍的核心概念随着我们的进展而相互构建。对于许多学生来说,像历史学家一样阅读将脱离教科书和工作表。学生需要跨主题和时间段进行反复练习才能从这种方法中获益最多。

Each of our chapters shows you how to apply aspects of Reading Like a Historian in your classroom. We organize each of our eight chapters around a historical question in American history, beginning with Exploration and Colonization and the events at Jamestown and ending with the Cuban Missile Crisis (see Table I.1). Obviously a book of this length can’t cover every topic in the curriculum. But what we can do is give you practice in using this approach with key events and provide you with models for extending these practices to other topics. Each chapter stands on its own. But you will also notice that the core concepts we introduce at the beginning build on one another as we go along. For many students, Reading Like a Historian will be a departure from working with textbooks and worksheets. Students will need repeated practice across topics and time periods to benefit most from this approach.

 

 

表 I.1。本书概述

Table I.1. Overview of the Book


图像

 

 

我们以一篇介绍性文章开头,为每一章奠定基础。这些文章的目的不是为了提供内容而提供内容,而是为您提供向中学生和高中生教授这些主题所需的历史背景。我们将在研究中与学生一起使用这些文件所收集到的见解融入到我们的讨论中。

We begin each chapter with an introductory essay that sets the stage. The goal of these essays is not to supply content for content’s sake, but to give you the historical background necessary for teaching these topics to middle and high school students. We weave into our discussions insights gleaned from using these documents with students in our research studies.

每篇文章后面都是向学生教授该主题所需的所有材料——主要文档、图表、图形组织、视觉图像和政治漫画——以及在互联网上寻找其他资源的建议。我们没有提供脚本化的课程计划,而是布置了以不同方式使用这些材料的灵活场景。这些场景是为了激发您的想象力而编写的,因为没有两种教学情况是相同的,您需要调整这些场景以适应您自己的课堂。同样,我们提供了一些让学生的思维可见的想法,以便您可以更好地理解他们的基本概念和信念。在每一章中,我们还提供了评估学生对核心历史思想的理解的想法。评估想法以粗体显示并在每个教学场景的页边空白处用图标突出显示,如下所示。

Following each essay are all the materials you’ll need to teach this topic to your students—primary documents, charts, graphic organizers, visual images, and political cartoons—as well as suggestions for where to find additional resources on the Internet. Rather than providing scripted lesson plans, we lay out flexible scenarios for using these materials in different ways. These scenarios are written to stimulate your imagination, for no two teaching situations are the same and you will need to adapt these scenarios to fit your own classroom. Similarly, we provide ideas for ways to make students’ thinking visible, so that you can better engage their underlying conceptions and beliefs. With each chapter we also provide ideas for assessing students’ understanding of core historical ideas. Assessment ideas appear in bold in the text and are highlighted with an icon in the margin of each teaching scenario, as shown here.

图像

在我们与老师一起举办的专业发展研讨会上,我们有时会遇到这样的观点:资料来源和开放式历史问题最适合我们的尖子生,不太适合阅读年级以下的学生。我们持相反的立场。我们相信,那些苦苦挣扎的读者需要学习如何像历史学家一样阅读的指导。

In our professional development workshops with teachers, we sometimes encounter the view that original sources and open historical questions are best suited to our top students and are less appropriate for students reading below grade level. We hold the opposite position. We believe that it is our struggling readers who most need instruction in learning how to read like a historian.

研究一再表明,青少年读写能力的关键是让学生接触丰富的文本,这些文本混合了“不同难度级别和不同主题”的体裁和风格。5正是那些发现阅读教科书具有挑战性并且从未在其他班级遇到过资料来源的学生最需要接触历史问题和解决这些问题的文献。当青少年的视野开阔时,他们就会成为流利的读者。文献记录是信件、日记、秘密公报、官方公告、公开演讲等的宝库,向读者展示了各种风格和结构的语言,突破了识字的界限。我们的学生最需要的正是这种丰富的饮食,而不是课本上的稀粥。

Research has shown over and over that a key to adolescent literacy is exposing students to a rich diet of texts that mix genre and style “at a variety of difficulty levels and on a variety of topics.”5 It is precisely those students who find reading a textbook challenging and have never encountered sources in their other classes who most need to be exposed to historical questions and the documents that address them. Adolescents become fluent readers when their horizons are broadened. The documentary record, a treasury of letters, diaries, secret communiqués, official promulgations, public speeches, and the like, confronts a reader with varied styles and textures of language that push the bounds of literacy. It is this rich diet, not the thin gruel of textbooks, that our students most need.

“但是等一下,”你可能会想。“学生到底如何阅读低于年级水平的阅读材料,或者对于英语作为第二语言的学生来说,他们应该如何处理充满奇怪术语和晦涩词汇的主要文档?” 我们提供了三种策略来处理这个非常现实的问题。

“But wait a second,” you might be thinking. “How in the world are students reading below grade level or for whom English is a second language supposed to deal with primary documents filled with odd terms and obscure vocabulary?” We provide three strategies for dealing with this very real problem.

首先,我们精确地选择了我们的文件,并对其进行了修剪,使其能够传达历史问题的本质。资料来源为学生提供了仔细阅读的机会。但请记住,阅读困难文本时保持注意力集中的能力与其长度成反比。主要来源是教学生放慢速度并仔细阅读、深入思考单词选择和潜台词的地方。

First, we’ve selected our documents with precision and trimmed them to the point where they convey the essence of a historical problem. Sources provide students with an opportunity for close reading. But remember, the ability to maintain concentration with a difficult text is inversely proportional to its length. Primary sources are the place to teach students to slow down and read closely, to think deeply about word choice and subtext.

其次,为了更好地集中学生的注意力,我们策略性地使用了省略号来修改文档。如果词汇和短语的变化仍然构成挑战,我们在文档底部提供了一个带有关键定义的词库。对于某些来源,我们会附上标题注释(“注释”),以帮助学生了解接下来的内容。

Second, to better focus students’ attention, we’ve modified documents with the strategic use of ellipses. In cases where vocabulary and turns of phrases still pose challenges, we include a Word Bank with key definitions at the bottom of the document. For some sources, we include a head note (“Note”) to help orient students to what follows.

第三,如果来源的原始语言对大多数学生构成障碍,我们会改编主要文档,规范拼写,简化语法,偶尔引入词汇变化,同时尽力保留尽可能多的原始结构和内容。尽力而为。除了大多数改编文档外,我们还包含原始文档或列出了易于查找的网址。

Third, in cases where the original language of a source poses a barrier to most students, we have adapted primary documents, conventionalizing spelling, simplifying syntax, and occasionally introducing changes in vocabulary—all the while trying to retain as much of their original texture and feel as we can. Alongside most adapted documents we’ve included the original or listed an easy-to-locate web address for finding it.

尽管我们的三个名字出现在封面上,但还有许多其他人为本书及其所包含的想法做出了慷慨的贡献。雅各布·道格拉斯 (Jacob Douglas) 撰写了第二章附带的文章初稿。Jack Schneider 是第 4 章和8章的作者。1998 年至 2000年间,在华盛顿大学与同事 Reed Stevens、Leslie Herrenkohl 和 Philip Bell 共同开展的国家科学基金会项目“通过历史和科学促进论证”(PATHS)中,本书中的想法在课堂上得到了检验。。6华盛顿州“金苹果”奖获​​奖教师 Wendy Ewbank 在 PATHS 中发挥了重要作用,我们国家科学基金会的项目官员 Elizabeth VanderPutten 也发挥了重要作用。

Although our three names appear on the cover, many others have generously contributed to this book and the ideas it contains. Jacob Douglas wrote the first draft of the essay accompanying Chapter 2. Jack Schneider was the author of Chapters 4 and 8. The ideas in this book were put to the test in classrooms between 1998 and 2000 in a National Science Foundation project, Promoting Argumentation Through History and Science (PATHS), conducted at the University of Washington with colleagues Reed Stevens, Leslie Herrenkohl, and Philip Bell.6 Wendy Ewbank, a Washington State “Golden Apple” Award-winning teacher, played an important role in PATHS, as did our program officer at the National Science Foundation, Elizabeth VanderPutten.

正是在斯坦福大学,“像历史学家一样阅读”的方法得到了发展。我们的培训基地是斯坦福大学教师教育计划(STEP)中为未来历史教师开设的课程。Abby Reisman、Brad Fogo 和 Eric Shed 为这项工作做出了重大贡献。艾比在旧金山五所高中进行了一项雄心勃勃的实地研究,将这些想法带到了一个完全不同的水平。这项研究表明,像历史学家一样阅读的方法不仅可以帮助学生学会历史性思考,还可以提高阅读理解能力。7多年来,我们有幸得到了 STEP 勇敢的总监 Rachel Lotan 的不懈支持,她以她的热情鼓励我们,并以她不懈的奉献精神激励我们。本书的写作得到了纽约卡内基公司新时代教师项目的资助,对此表示衷心感谢。

It was at Stanford that the Reading Like a Historian approach gained momentum. Our training ground was a course for future history teachers in the Stanford Teacher Education Program (STEP). Abby Reisman, Brad Fogo, and Eric Shed contributed substantially to this effort. And it was Abby who took these ideas and brought them to an entirely different level in an ambitious field study in five San Francisco high schools. This study showed that the Reading Like a Historian approach not only helps students learn to think historically, but also leads to gains in reading comprehension.7 Over the years we’ve been blessed with the unflagging support of Rachel Lotan, STEP’s intrepid director, who encouraged us with her enthusiasm and inspired us with her tireless dedication. The writing of this book was supported by a grant from the Teachers for a New Era Project of the Carnegie Corporation of New York, and that support is gratefully acknowledged.

最后,我们应该声明我们希望显而易见的事情:这本书不能替代你的教科书,也没有试图替代。它所能做的就是为你提供如何创造性地使用你的教科书以及如何弥补其缺点的想法。本书中的练习将帮助您的学生了解他们的教科书并不是与摩西在西奈山收到的石板一起包装的。我们希望学生们能够看到他们的教科书的本质:另一种来源,有时有用,有时有缺陷,往往更多地受到收养委员会的突发奇想和盛行的政治风向的影响,而不是文献记录中的任何内容。8很少有老师可以自由地放弃他们的国家课程并独自快乐地离开。但即使在国家标准、50 分钟的时间和无休止的测试方案的限制下,仍然有空间去做好的和创造性的工作。本书提供了如何做到这一点的想法。

Finally, we should state what we hope is obvious: This book is no substitute for your textbook, nor does it try to be. What it can do is give you ideas for how to use your textbook creatively and how to compensate for its shortcomings. The exercises in this book will help your students understand that their textbook did not come shrink-wrapped along with the tablets that Moses received on Mount Sinai. We hope that students will come to see their textbook for what it is: another source, sometimes useful, sometimes flawed, often shaped more by the whims of adoption committees and prevailing political winds than anything in the documentary record.8 Few teachers have the liberty to jettison their state curriculum and go off merrily on their own. But even within the constraints of state standards, 50-minute periods, and an endless regimen of testing, there’s room to do good and creative work. This book provides ideas for how to do so.

我们对您使用此方法的反馈和经验非常感兴趣。请写信给我们SHEG@suse.stanford.edu,并务必查看我们网站上的其他资源:历史思维问题项目、http ://historicalthinkingmatters.org/、http : //beyondthebubble.stanford.edu、以及斯坦福历史教育集团的主页,http://sheg.stanford.edu

We are very much interested in your feedback and experience in using this approach. Write to us at SHEG@suse.stanford.edu, and be sure to check out the additional resources on our websites: the Historical Thinking Matters Project, http://historicalthinkingmatters.org/, http://beyondthebubble.stanford.edu, and the home page for the Stanford History Education Group, http://sheg.stanford.edu.

 

 


第1章

CHAPTER 1


波卡洪塔斯救了约翰·史密斯吗?

Did Pocahontas Rescue John Smith?

几个世纪以来,风中奇缘一直吸引着我们的想象力。她是一位伟大的印度酋长的女儿,后来成为一位英国船长的新娘,也是 17 世纪伦敦的话题,几代人通过诗歌、艺术和故事来纪念她。她和约翰·史密斯是我们国家起源故事的中心人物:她对史密斯的营救可能是 1607 年和 1608 年英国詹姆斯敦原始殖民地历史上最著名的部分。2006 年,也就是第 400 届战争的前一年在所谓的救援周年纪念日,有关波卡洪塔斯和约翰·史密斯的新书摆满了书店。您可以选择为儿童或成人、学者或休闲读者编写的书籍。但即使在四个世纪之后,这些新书对要讲述的故事也没有达成一致。波卡洪塔斯和约翰·史密斯之间究竟发生了什么?

Pocahontas has captured our imaginations for centuries. Daughter of a great Indian chief, eventual bride of an English captain, and the talk of 17th-century London, she has been memorialized through poetry, art, and storytelling by generations. She and John Smith are lodged at the center of our stories about our country’s origins: Her rescue of Smith may be the best-known part of the history of the original English Jamestown colony of 1607 and 1608. In 2006, a year before the 400th anniversary of the supposed rescue, new volumes about Pocahontas and John Smith filled the bookstores. You could choose from books written for children or adults, scholars, or leisurely readers. But even after 4 centuries, these new books did not agree on the story to be told. What really happened between Pocahontas and John Smith?

华特迪士尼公司负责我们许多学生最了解的版本。在 1995 年的电影中,我们了解到,身材苗条、自由奔放的 19 岁女孩波卡洪塔斯和英俊潇洒的殖民者约翰·史密斯坠入爱河,无视印第安人和殖民者之间不得接触的命令。 。在电影的戏剧性高潮中,波卡洪塔斯阻止了她的父亲兼部落首领波瓦坦将史密斯棍打致死。她的勇气和同情心导致双方放下武器,并开创了两种交战文化之间宽容的新时代。这是一个简洁的故事,充满了戏剧、浪漫和道德教训。但人们、社会及其历史很少如此整洁(更不用说如此有吸引力和音乐性了)。这次救援真的发生了吗?

The Walt Disney Company is responsible for the version that many of our students know best. In the 1995 movie, we learned that Pocahontas, a svelte, free-spirited 19-year-old, and John Smith, a dashing hunk of a colonist, fell in love, flouting orders that there should be no contact between the Indians and colonists. In the movie’s dramatic climax, Pocahontas prevented Powhatan, her father and chief of the tribe, from cudgeling Smith to death. Her act of courage and compassion led to both sides laying down arms, and ushered in a new era of tolerance between two warring cultures. It is a tidy story, complete with drama, romance, and a moral lesson. But people, societies, and their histories are rarely this tidy (let alone so attractive and musical). Did this rescue really happen?

史学争论

Historiographical Debate

阅读当代作品,你不会找到直接的答案。在记者大卫·普莱斯的书《詹姆斯敦的爱与恨:约翰·史密斯、波卡洪塔斯和新国家的心》中,你会发现正如书名所暗示的那样:史密斯和波卡洪塔斯的浪漫故事,她被年长的旅行者所吸引,并拯救了她。他免于死亡。1普莱斯称此次救援(一章的标题)为“史密斯职业生涯中最著名且最具争议的旅程”,并声称证据表明救援确实发生过。2然后,他将对争议的讨论放在书的边缘,这样就不会分散读者对主要故事的注意力。历史学家卡米拉·汤森德的书《风中奇缘与波瓦坦困境》就在普莱斯发表一年后,明确指出救援并未发生3两位作者都同意围绕波卡洪塔斯营救约翰·史密斯的故事存在争议,两人都使用相同的历史证据来论证自己的观点,但各自得出相反的结论。我们有一个历史问题:风中奇缘救了约翰·史密斯吗?

Read contemporary works and you will not find a straightforward answer. In journalist David Price’s book, Love and Hate in Jamestown: John Smith, Pocahontas, and the Heart of a New Nation, you will find what the title suggests: a romantic tale of Smith and Pocahontas where she is attracted to the older traveler and saves him from death.1 Price calls the rescue (a title of one chapter) the “most famous and controversial journey of Smith’s career” and asserts that the evidence indicates the rescue did happen.2 He then relegates a discussion of the controversy to the margins of his book so it doesn’t divert the reader from his main story. Historian Camilla Townsend’s book, Pocahontas and the Powhatan Dilemma, published just a year after Price’s, unequivocally states that the rescue did not happen.3 Both authors agree that controversy surrounds the story of Pocahontas’s rescue of John Smith, both use the same historical evidence to make their case, but each comes to opposite conclusions. We have a historical problem: Did Pocahontas rescue John Smith?

图像

Simon van de Passe,《波卡洪塔斯》,1616 年,版画,6⁄4 x 4⁄4 英寸,发表于约翰·史密斯的《通史》,1624 年,弗吉尼亚历史学会,可从http://www.indiana.edu/~wfh/images/pocahontas/pages获取/aapocengrav1616_jpg.htm

Simon van de Passe, Pocahontas, 1616, engraving, 6¾ x 4¾ in., published in John Smith’s Generall Historie, 1624, Virginia Historical Society, available at http://www.indiana.edu/~wfh/images/pocahontas/pages/aapocengrav1616_jpg.htm

救援的故事并不新鲜。几代美国人都是听着这句话长大的。那么我们如何知道它是否发生了呢?如果这个故事的真实性有争议,那么它是从哪里来的呢?

The story of the rescue is not new. Generations of Americans have grown up hearing it. So how do we know whether it happened? Where did the story come from if its authenticity is debatable?

答案来自约翰·史密斯本人。唯一留下书面记录的事件目击者是史密斯,但他对该事件的描述充满了不一致之处。第一篇写于 1608 年,据推测是在这一年发生了救援,但没有提及威胁或救援,并使用“友谊”和“善意”等词语来描述与波瓦坦的会面(参见来源 1.1;所有来源均位于每章末尾)。“他用善意的言辞和丰盛的杂粮热情地欢迎了我,向我保证了他的友谊,并保证我在四天内的自由。” 4另一方面,16 年后写的另一篇报道使用了“野蛮”和“可怕”等词语来描述与波瓦坦的会面,这就是我们第一次听到酋长的女儿波卡洪塔斯“她把自己的[头]放在他的头上,以拯救他免于死亡”(见来源1.2)。5全文如下:

The answer is, from John Smith himself. The only eyewitness to the supposed event who left a paper trail was Smith, but his accounts of the event are riddled with inconsistencies. The first, written in 1608, the year the rescue supposedly occurred, makes no mention of the threat or rescue, and uses words like “friendship” and “kindness” to describe meeting Powhatan (see Source 1.1; all Sources are located at the end of each chapter). “Hee kindly welcomed me with good wordes and great platters of sundrie Victuals, assuring mee his friendship, and my libertie within foure days.”4 On the other hand, another account, written 16 years afterward, uses words like “barbarous” and “fearful” to describe the meeting with Powhatan, and this is where we first hear the famous claim that the chief’s daughter, Pocahontas, “laid her owne [head] upon his to save him from death” (see Source 1.2).5 The entire passage reads:

他们以最野蛮的方式招待了他之后,进行了长时间的协商,但结论是,两块大石头被带到波瓦坦面前:然后,尽可能多的人能把手放在他身上,把他拖到他们身边,然后把他的石头放在上面。国王最亲爱的女儿波卡洪塔斯准备用棍棒打出他的大脑,当恳求无法奏效时,她用手臂抱住了他的头,并用自己的头压在了他的头上,以挽救他的生命。皇帝很满意他能过这样的生活。

Having feasted him after their best barbarous manner they could, a long consultation was held, but the conclusion was, two great stones were brought before Powhatan: then, as many as could layd hands on him, dragged him to them, and thereon laid his head, and being ready with their clubs, to beate out his brains, Pocahontas the King’s dearest daughter, when no intreaty could prevaile, got his head in her armes, and laid her owne upon his to save him from death; whereat the Emperour was contented he should live.

为什么一个叙述中提到了救援,而另一个叙述中却没有提到?如果一名印度女孩营救他的真相曝光,史密斯是否害怕被斥责为不够男人?他是否只是想在第一个叙述中描述这片新土地和陌生的人民,而选择省略个人故事?在第二个叙述中,他是否利用波卡洪塔斯 1616 年以印度公主和约翰·罗尔夫的妻子身份前往伦敦后的名声,从而将自己塑造成她早年生活中的一个角色,而现在她已经死了,无法回应?(波卡洪塔斯于 1617 年在一艘返回弗吉尼亚的船上死于天花。)他的话是为了表明波卡洪塔斯是杰出的吗?6

Why is the rescue mentioned in one account and not the other? Was Smith scared of being berated as less of a man if the truth about an Indian girl rescuing him came to light? Was he merely trying to describe this new land and unfamiliar peoples in the first account, choosing to omit personal stories? And in the second account, was he capitalizing on Pocahontas’s fame following her 1616 voyage to London as Indian princess and wife of John Rolfe, thus casting himself as a character in her early life now that she was dead and unable to respond? (Pocahontas succumbed to smallpox aboard a ship taking her back to Virginia in 1617.) Were his words designed to represent Pocahontas as exceptional, a sympathetic and peaceful Indian who converted to Christianity and differed radically from the rest of the Powhatan peoples who had become fierce enemies of the British in the intervening years?6

历史学家如何看待史密斯的两个叙述之间的对比?第一个对约翰·史密斯的诚实进行攻击的历史学家是约翰·亚当斯总统的曾孙亨利·亚当斯。亨利·亚当斯声称,考虑到史密斯最初的沉默以及两个叙述之间语气和细节的不一致,没有一个有思想的人会相信这个营救故事(见来源 1.3)。7虽然亚当斯的论点有道理,但他撰写这篇评论的年份(1867 年)也很能说明问题。后来的历史学家读了亚当斯的私人信件,发现他的怀疑是出于政治动机:攻击弗吉尼亚最喜欢的儿子,一位在殖民早期残酷日子里对詹姆斯敦的生存负有责任的英雄,实际上是对这个在内战。这并不是最后一次利用救援故事来传达与事件本身无关的信息。

What do historians make of the contrast between Smith’s two accounts? The first historian to publish an attack on John Smith’s honesty was Henry Adams, great-grandson of President John Adams. Henry Adams claimed that no thinking person could believe the rescue story, given both Smith’s initial silence and the inconsistencies in tone and detail between the two accounts (see Source 1.3).7 While Adams’s argument is reasonable, the year that he penned this critique, 1867, is also telling. Later historians would read Adams’s personal letters and find his skepticism politically motivated: attacking Virginia’s favorite son, a hero responsible for Jamestown’s survival in the early, brutal days of colonization, was in effect a swipe at this state that had been on the wrong side in the Civil War. It would not be the last time that the rescue story was used to send a message that had little to do with the event itself.

尽管如此,亚当斯还是暴露了这个历史问题,后来的历史学家继续试图解决这个问题。历史学家保罗·刘易斯(Paul Lewis)在《大盗贼:约翰·史密斯传记》中同意亚当斯关于救援可能性不大的观点(见资料来源 1.5)。8他询问了有关证实消息来源的问题,并对史密斯提出质疑,称史密斯的各个账户中存在修饰和不一致的情况。刘易斯指出,史密斯的救援故事首次出现时,正值波卡洪塔斯成为伦敦公报的宠儿并受到皇室关注。

Nevertheless, Adams surfaced the historical problem and later historians would continue to try to solve it. Historian Paul Lewis, in The Great Rogue: A Biography of John Smith, agreed with Adams about the improbability of a rescue (see Source 1.5).8 He asked questions about corroborating sources and challenged Smith on what he claimed were embellishments and inconsistencies within his separate accounts. Lewis pointed out that Smith’s rescue story first appeared just as Pocahontas was becoming the darling of the London Gazette and basking in royal attention.

其他历史学家相信史密斯的话,但即使承认这一事件可能发生过,他们也声称史密斯没有抓住要点。学者 JA Leo Lemay 在《约翰·史密斯船长的美国梦》中认为史密斯是一位值得信赖的作家,他出于不同的目的写了不同的叙述:第一个叙述中描述了新土地,第二个叙述中促进了对它的殖民化(见来源1.4) 。9勒梅还提供了另一项主要证据来证明自己的观点:史密斯 1616 年写给安妮女王的一封信,描述了此次救援行动。勒梅声称,毫无疑问该事件发生了,但史密斯误解了其含义:与其说这是一次营救,不如说这是一场精心设计的当地仪式。历史学家菲利普·巴伯(Philip Barbour)对此表示同意,声称该事件实际上是美洲原住民的仪式,旨在象征死亡和重生,象征着史密斯在波瓦坦的赞助下承担了新的部落身份(见来源1.6 10显然发生了一些事情,但其重要性却被中心演员误解了。

Other historians took Smith at his word but, even while accepting that this event may have happened, claimed that Smith missed the point. Scholar J. A. Leo Lemay in The American Dream of Captain John Smith argued that Smith was a trustworthy author who wrote different accounts for different purposes: to describe the new land in the first account, to promote colonization of it in the second (see Source 1.4).9 Lemay included another piece of primary evidence to make his case: a letter Smith wrote to Queen Anne in 1616 describing the rescue. Lemay claimed that there was no doubt that the event happened, but that Smith misunderstood its meaning: It was less a rescue than an elaborate native ritual. Historian Philip Barbour agreed, claiming that the event was actually a Native American rite meant to signify death and rebirth, symbolizing Smith’s assumption of a new tribal identity under Powhatan’s patronage (see Source 1.6).10 Something obviously happened, but its import was misunderstood by the actor at its center.

盘点一下,这个故事的事实到底是什么?这些事实意味着什么?虽然这些问题没有简单的答案,但提出这些问题使我们成为“像历史学家一样阅读”方法的核心。

To take stock, what exactly are the facts of the story? What do these facts mean? While there are no easy answers to these questions, asking them puts us at the heart of the Reading Like a Historian approach.

风中奇缘和约翰·史密斯是美国神话中的人物。一位冒险家所写的 400 年前的叙述中的一个段落,被一位当代人称为“野心勃勃、不值得、虚荣” 11,催生了一个美国人乐此不疲的故事。我们关于美国最受欢迎的印第安公主波卡洪塔斯的故事通常以史密斯的获救开始,这一事件显示了她在面对邪恶行为时的勇敢和独立。事实上,我们对这些历史人物和救援故事的再现本身已经成为合法的研究对象,因为它们反映了它们被创造的历史时间和地点。12

Pocahontas and John Smith are the stuff of American myth. A single paragraph in a 400-year-old account written by an adventurer whom one contemporary called “ambityous unworthy and vaynglorious”11 spawned a story of which Americans never tire. Our story of Pocahontas, America’s favorite Indian princess, usually starts with Smith’s rescue, an event that shows her bravery and independence when faced with an evil deed. In fact, the representations we have of these historical figures and of the rescue story have become legitimate objects of study themselves, as they reflect the historical time and place in which they were created.12

亨利·亚当斯和迪士尼公司并不是唯一以自己的利益来叙述这个故事的作者。想想约翰·查普曼 (John Chapman) 的画作《弗吉尼亚州詹姆斯敦的风中奇缘的洗礼》(Baptism of Pocahontas at Jamestown, Virginia), 1840 年挂在国会大厦圆形大厅,比记者约翰·奥沙利文 (John O'Sullivan) 创造“昭昭命运”一词早几年,而向西征服的势头正在增强。这幅画颂扬了波卡洪塔斯皈依基督教,暗示将基督教带给印第安人是一项现实而崇高的努力(即使,正如画中所描绘的,一些粗暴、坏的印第安人拒绝了它)。更轻率地考虑一下亚马逊网站上出售的由钻石和珍珠制成的带有波卡洪塔斯名字的昂贵珠宝。

Henry Adams and the Disney Company are not the only authors to narrate this story to their advantage. Consider John Chapman’s painting, Baptism of Pocahontas at Jamestown, Virginia, hung in the Capitol Rotunda in 1840 a few years before journalist John O’Sullivan coined the term “manifest destiny,” and the work of westward conquest was gaining steam. The painting glorifies Pocahontas’s conversion to Christianity, suggesting that bringing Christianity to the Indians is a realistic and noble endeavor (even if, as depicted in the painting, some surly, bad Indians rejected it). Consider, on a more frivolous note, the costly jewelry made of diamonds and pearls that bears Pocahontas’s name available at Amazon.com.

风中奇缘和救援故事的神话化对于理解和捕捉真实发生的事情意味着什么?人类学家海伦·朗特里和历史学家卡米拉·汤森等学者认为,它模糊并缩小了我们对过去的视野。13焦点集中在浪漫的印度公主和英国船长的吸引人的画面上,掩盖了英国人/波瓦坦人的遭遇以及随着殖民者开始将切萨皮克岛作为永久家园而各群体之间不断变化的关系的更大故事。风中奇缘的故事被简化为 CliffsNotes 形式的童话故事,导致学生们错过了了解有关这次遭遇和参与其中的人们的重要知识的机会。

And what has the mythologizing of Pocahontas and the rescue story meant for understanding and capturing what really happened? Scholars like anthropologist Helen Rountree and historian Camilla Townsend argue that it has obscured and narrowed our vision of this past.13 Focusing on an appealing picture of a romantic Indian princess and British captain has blotted out larger stories of British/Powhatan encounters and the groups’ evolving relationship as the colonists began to make the Chesapeake their permanent home. Pocahontas’s story, reduced to a fairytale, CliffsNotes form, leads students to miss out on learning significant things about this encounter and the peoples involved in it.

事实上,我们无法了解波卡洪塔斯的话语,因此我们对整个故事保持着震耳欲聋的沉默。事实上,我们所有的书面资料都是由英国人撰写的,我们无法获得波卡洪塔斯人民未经中介的声音。虽然史密斯、威廉·斯特雷奇和其他人对切萨皮克印第安人留下了冗长的描述,但他们的描述必然经过作者的文化和个人棱镜的过滤。历史学家必须仔细阅读这些书面证据。汤森告诉她的读者,她通过阅读史密斯的叙述并“将每一个陈述放在其撰写的背景中,并将其与确认或谴责的外部证据并列”来挑选出该事件的细节——本质上是历史学家最擅长的事情,14汤森对“英国人所知道的”的明确处理坚定地表明,我们需要知道史密斯的同时代人和同胞如何看待和描绘印第安人和殖民化,才能理解这一事件和史密斯的竞争对手的叙述。

The fact that we do not have access to Pocahontas’s words leaves us with a deafening silence about the complete story. In fact, all our written sources were composed by British men, and we have no access to the unmediated voices of Pocahontas’s people. While Smith, William Strachey, and others left lengthy descriptions of the Indians of the Chesapeake, their accounts are necessarily filtered through the authors’ cultural and personal prisms. Historians must read this written evidence closely. Townsend tells her readers that she culled the specifics of the event from reading Smith’s accounts and “placing each statement in the context in which it was written and juxtaposing it against confirming or damning external evidence”—essentially doing what historians do best, contextualizing and corroborating text to understand what it tells us about the past.14 Townsend’s explicit treatment of “what the English knew” firmly establishes that we need to know how Smith’s contemporaries and compatriots viewed and portrayed Indians and colonization to understand this event and Smith’s rival accounts.

同样,了解切萨皮克印第安人的社会——他们的日常生活、仪式和住所——有助于了解这一事件及其发生的背景。考古学家和人类学家帮助建立了这方面的知识。为了记录波瓦坦酋长管辖地的范围和发展以及不同印第安部落和村庄之间的关系,E. 伦道夫·特纳 (E. Randolph Turner) 查阅了考古和地理数据来补充英国的记载。15他和其他人分析了出土陶瓷及其位置之间的差异和一致性,以及幸存的贸易商品(如铜和贝壳文物)。印第安人定居点周围防御悬崖的证据有助于我们了解切萨皮克部落如何相处。这些学者利用他们掌握的证据来重建印度对这次遭遇的可能看法。

Similarly, knowing about the Chesapeake Indians’ societies—their routines, rituals, and residences—sheds light on this event and the context in which it occurred. Archeologists and anthropologists have helped in building this knowledge. To document the scope and growth of Powhatan’s chiefdom and relations between different Indian tribes and villages, E. Randolph Turner looked to archeological and geographical data to complement the English accounts.15 He and others analyzed variations and consistencies between unearthed ceramics and their locations, as well as surviving trade goods like copper and sea shell artifacts. Evidence of defensive cliffs surrounding Indian settlements contributes to what we know about how the tribes of the Chesapeake got along. These scholars use the evidence available to them to reconstruct possible Indian perspectives on the encounter.

这在多大程度上弥补了那些卷入这些早期殖民努力的人民的沉默?目前还不清楚,但对约翰·史密斯/波卡洪塔斯相遇的世界的更完整的了解肯定有助于理解什么是可能的,什么是不可能的。与此同时,新的信息正在被发现。2003年,在弗吉尼亚州格洛斯特县发现了一个地点,确定为Werowocomoco,即救援发生的村庄。考古学家兴奋地发现了比英国人早 150 多年的沟渠,这一发现表明村庄内的世俗空间和神圣空间是分开的。更薄、更脆弱的陶器碎片区分了神圣的空间;学者们推测这可能是波瓦坦的住所。16考古学家继续挖掘该遗址,寻找更多线索来了解这个没有留下书面记录的人。

How much does this compensate for the silence of the peoples most embroiled in these early colonization efforts? It’s not clear, but surely a more complete picture of the world of the John Smith/Pocahontas encounter contributes to understanding what is and isn’t likely. Meanwhile, new information is being uncovered. In 2003, a site determined to be Werowocomoco, the village where the rescue would have happened, was discovered in Gloucester County, Virginia. Archeologists thrilled in discovering ditches predating the English by more than 150 years, a find that suggested a separation of secular and sacred spaces within the village. Thinner, more fragile pottery shards distinguish the sacred space; scholars have speculated that it may have been Powhatan’s living quarters.16 Archeologists continue to excavate that site for more clues to understanding this people who left no written record.

首先,学者们表明,波瓦坦人并不是一个孤立的或孤独的部落,而是切萨皮克地区广泛的部落间网络的一部分。由于拥有共同的语言和生活方式,波瓦坦酋长是被称为阿尔冈金人的印第安群体的一部分,领导着一个类似于部落联盟的组织。该联盟在弗吉尼亚州潮水地区扩展了 6,000 多平方英里,并在他的领导下发展到了 30 多个部落和 12,000 人。这些部落中的每一个都向波瓦坦进贡,并拥有一位忠于联邦和波瓦坦的酋长或部落酋长。部落可能通过战争、联盟和部落间通婚加入联邦。

First, scholars have shown that the Powhatan were not an isolated or loner tribe, but part of an extensive intertribal network on the Chesapeake. Part of the Indian group called the Algonquian by virtue of a shared language and way of life, Chief Powhatan led something akin to a tribal federation. The federation extended more than 6,000 square miles in the Tidewater area of Virginia and grew to more than 30 tribes and 12,000 people under his leadership. Each of these tribes paid tribute to Powhatan and had a chief, or werowance, loyal to the federation and Powhatan. Tribes probably joined the federation through war, alliances, and intertribal marriage.

此外,当英国人到达詹姆斯敦时,波卡洪塔斯的父亲对外交或群体间关系世界并不陌生:他已经是不同群体的强大领导者。汤森德称他为“一位杰出的战略家” 17,而巴伯则用“专制主义”一词来形容他的治理。18英国人拥有外国但有用的工具、大船和奇怪的方式,对波瓦坦来说也不陌生。西班牙人已经到达该地区并与印第安人发生小规模冲突:这并不是欧洲人第一次到达他们中间。

Further, Pocahontas’s father was not new to the world of diplomacy or intergroup relations when the English arrived in Jamestown: He was already a powerful leader of diverse groups. Skilled and successful at diplomacy in his world, Townsend calls him “a brilliant strategist”17 while Barbour uses the word “despotism” to describe his governance.18 Nor were the British, with their foreign but useful tools, their big ships and strange ways, new to Powhatan. The Spanish had already been to the region and skirmished with the Indians: This was not the first time Europeans had arrived in their midst.

英国殖民者知道西班牙早期的努力,这影响了他们的计划和方法。当苏珊康斯坦号发现号神速号抵达时,乘客们计划殖民该地区,事实上,他们知道该地区是一个他们希望填补的权力真空。但英国人并不同意当地人的这种观点,他们在建立一个富有成效和自给自足的定居点方面的无能和麻烦可能有助于他们作为临时访客的掩盖故事。然而,这也导致了现在臭名昭著的“饥饿时代”,在定居点的第一个冬天,约翰·史密斯船长开始向上游航行,用工具和珠子换取玉米,以拯救他的同胞。饥饿。在沿奇卡霍米尼河逆流而上最远的旅程中,他被波瓦坦的兄弟奥佩坎卡诺 (Opechancanough) 抓获,并被从一个村庄带到另一个村庄。12 月下旬,史密斯被带到距离詹姆斯敦 12 英里的 Werowocomoco 的 Powhatan 面前。这里是救援故事的发生地,也是风中奇缘故事的开始地。

The British colonizers knew of the earlier Spanish efforts, and this influenced their plans and approach. When the Susan Constant, Discovery, and Godspeed arrived, the passengers had designs on colonizing the area, and in fact knew the region as a power vacuum that they hoped to fill. But the British didn’t share this view with the natives, and their ineptness and trouble with creating a productive and self-sustaining settlement may have helped their cover story of being temporary visitors. However, it also led to what is now infamously known as “the starving times,” and in the first winter of the settlement, Captain John Smith started making voyages upriver to trade tools and beads for corn to save his compatriots from starvation. In his furthest trip up the Chickahominy River, he was captured by Opechancanough, Powhatan’s brother, and taken from village to village. In late December Smith was brought before Powhatan at Werowocomoco, 12 miles from Jamestown. This is the site of the rescue story and where the story of Pocahontas begins.

考虑到她作为具有多种用途的偶像的地位,令人惊讶的是我们实际上对风中奇缘的可证实的了解是多么的少。波瓦坦的女儿和一位不知名的母亲大约在 9 岁或 10 岁的时候,她第一次在村子里看到了被俘的约翰·史密斯,也就是所谓的救援发生的时候。第二年,波卡洪塔斯成为詹姆斯敦的常客。她带来了和解条款,并被史密斯认为负责安全返回一些印第安人质。她为殖民者和印第安人翻译,汤森推测她可能对史密斯记录的唯一幸存的阿尔冈昆语完整句子负责。虽然她来访的确切性质尚不清楚,但他们似乎很友好且乐于助人。然而,在过年之前,

Given her status as icon serving multiple purposes, it is striking how little verifiable knowledge about Pocahontas we actually have. The daughter of Powhatan and an unknown mother was about 9 or 10 years old when she would have first seen the captive John Smith in her village—and when the supposed rescue happened. In the following year, Pocahontas was a frequent visitor to Jamestown. She brought the settlement provisions and was credited by Smith with being responsible for the safe return of some Indian hostages. She translated for the colonists and Indians, and Townsend conjectures that she may be responsible for the sole surviving Algonquian complete sentence recorded by Smith. While the exact nature of her visits is unknown, they seem to be friendly and helpful. However, before the year was up, she stopped visiting the colony and there is a single report that she married an Indian named Kocoom.

直到 1613 年她被一位有进取心的英国人塞缪尔·阿加尔船长绑架后,她才再次出现在英国的记载中。在此期间,史密斯带着火药伤返回英国,印第安人和殖民者之间的敌对行动加剧。听说波瓦坦的女儿就在他的船附近,阿戈尔抓住机会利用这位印度公主为英国谋取利益。联邦部落的一名成员帕托沃梅克帮助引诱波卡洪塔斯登上阿加尔的船,她被抓获并勒索赎金。三个月来,波瓦坦没有回应赎金要求,后来部分满足了要求。获释后,波卡洪塔斯在不确定的条件下留在了詹姆斯敦,并在一年之内皈依了基督教,并遇到了约翰·罗尔夫并与之结婚。1615 年,两人生下了儿子托马斯·罗尔夫 (Thomas Rolfe),次年,他们启航前往英国。在那里,波卡洪塔斯被视为印度公主,受到詹姆斯一世国王和安妮女王的宫廷接待。西蒙·范德帕斯也在此时制作了她唯一现存的肖像,这幅版画现在悬挂在史密森尼博物馆中。1617 年春天,波卡洪塔斯的家人启航返回弗吉尼亚,但在他们离开英格兰之前,她就病倒了。她当时应该是19岁或20岁。

She did not appear again in British accounts until she was kidnapped in 1613 by an enterprising Englishman, Captain Samuel Argall. In the intervening years, Smith had returned to England with a gunpowder injury, and hostilities between the Indians and the colonists had accelerated. Hearing that Powhatan’s daughter was near his ship, Argall seized the opportunity to use the Indian princess to British advantage. A member of a federation tribe, Patowomeck, helped lure Pocahontas aboard Argall’s ship, where she was captured and held for ransom. For 3 months, Powhatan didn’t respond to the ransom demands and then partially met them. Upon her release, Pocahontas stayed in Jamestown, under uncertain conditions, and within a year had converted to Christianity and met and married John Rolfe. In 1615, the two had a son, Thomas Rolfe, and the following year, they set sail for England. There, Pocahontas was regarded as an Indian princess and received at the court of King James I and Queen Anne. This is also when Simon Van de Passe produced the only existing portrait of her, an engraving that now hangs in the Smithsonian. Pocahontas’s family set sail for their return to Virginia in the spring of 1617, but she fell ill and died before they cleared England. She would have been 19 or 20 years old.

风中奇缘是当今美国人心目中浪漫且受欢迎的历史人物,这次救援塑造了我们对她的看法。然而,我们所知道的关于这次救援的常见故事可能更多是神话而不是历史。历史学家和学者们在追求准确讲述这个故事的同时,仍在争论神话之外的真相。近几十年来,人们对理解和融入与该活动相关的印度观点和文化现实给予了新的关注。巴伯、勒梅、朗特里和汤森——所有这些学者都对此很关注,但即便如此,他们对这一事件的解释也有所不同。问题依然存在。是否有证据让我们相信波瓦坦的部落进行了巴伯建议的那种重生仪式?如果我们专注于救援 我们是否错过了风中奇缘的真正历史意义——作为一名文化经纪人,他与英国人的互动以及最终与罗尔夫的婚姻更多地是外交而不是感情?鉴于她在当时的事件中只是一个次要角色,我们对她的关注是否被误导和夸大了?在英国殖民切萨皮克地区的美国故事中,营救故事如何让其他故事黯然失色?至此,我们讲述的关于波卡洪塔斯和救援的故事已经有了自己的生命,与任何历史证据无关。海伦·朗特里(Helen Rountree)对波卡洪塔斯(Pocahontas)所教给我们的内容又添加了另一个转折。鉴于她在当时的事件中只是一个小角色?在英国殖民切萨皮克地区的美国故事中,营救故事如何让其他故事黯然失色?至此,我们讲述的关于波卡洪塔斯和救援的故事已经有了自己的生命,与任何历史证据无关。海伦·朗特里(Helen Rountree)对波卡洪塔斯(Pocahontas)所教给我们的内容又添加了另一个转折。鉴于她在当时的事件中只是一个小角色?在英国殖民切萨皮克地区的美国故事中,营救故事如何让其他故事黯然失色?至此,我们讲述的关于波卡洪塔斯和救援的故事已经有了自己的生命,与任何历史证据无关。海伦·朗特里(Helen Rountree)对波卡洪塔斯(Pocahontas)所教给我们的内容又添加了另一个转折。

Pocahontas is a romantic and popular historical figure for Americans today, and the rescue is what frames our perception of her. However, the common story that we know about this rescue may be more myth than history. Historians and scholars still debate the truth beyond the myth while pursuing an accurate telling of the story. In recent decades, new attention has been paid to understanding and incorporating Indian perspectives and cultural realities relevant to the event. Barbour, Lemay, Rountree, and Townsend—all of these scholars are attentive to this, but even so, they differ in their interpretations of the event. Questions persist. Is there evidence to convince us that Powhatan’s tribe engaged in the kinds of ritual rebirths suggested by Barbour? And if we focus on the rescue, do we miss out on the true historical significance of Pocahontas—as a cultural broker whose interactions with the British, and eventual marriage to Rolfe, were more about diplomacy than affection? Is our focus on her misguided and overblown, given that she was a minor character in the events of the time? How did the rescue story eclipse all else in the American story of the British colonization of the Chesapeake region? At this point, the stories that we tell about Pocahontas and the rescue have taken on a life of their own, separate from any historical evidence. Helen Rountree adds still another twist on what Pocahontas teaches us.

故事讲述了一位年轻女子牢牢扎根于自己的文化中,被好战的新来者扣为人质,被迫又自愿地融入他们的文化,死于一种神秘的疾病,被埋在远离祖国的地方,最终被主流社会用作象征的故事。因为她自己的人民遭受的压迫不仅是对波卡洪塔斯经历的真实描述,而且也是几代原住民历史的象征。19

The story of a young woman firmly rooted in her own culture, held hostage by bellicose newcomers, forcibly and then willingly assimilated into their culture, killed by a mysterious disease, buried far from her homeland, and ultimately used by the dominant society as a symbol for the oppression of her own people is not only an authentic account of Pocahontas’s experiences but is also emblematic of the histories of generations of Native people.19

有关波卡洪塔斯和约翰·史密斯的文献和学术成果广泛而生动。从巴伯引人注目的故事和勒梅仔细而有说服力的分析,到朗特里的民族历史方法和蒂尔顿对神话制作的详细讲述,这个故事背后的真相值得调查。更重要的是,约翰·史密斯的“营救”故事暴露了历史的弱点,并向我们表明,许多美国人所认为的事实实际上依赖于单一的(有些可疑的)来源。当我们将此来源与同一作者的其他文档进行比较时,问题就会成倍增加。真正的历史就是提出问题,这使得波卡洪塔斯/约翰·史密斯的故事成为引导我们的学生进入历史探测艺术的理想选择。

The literature and scholarship concerning Pocahontas and John Smith are extensive and lively. From Barbour’s compelling story and Lemay’s careful and persuasive analysis to Rountree’s ethnohistorical approach and Tilton’s detailed telling of the making of a myth, the truth behind this story is worth investigating. More important, the story of John Smith’s “rescue” lays bare history’s weak points and shows us that what so many Americans have taken as fact relies, in fact, on a single (somewhat dubious) source. And when we compare this source to other documents from the same author, questions multiply. Genuine history is about asking questions, which makes the Pocahontas/John Smith story the ideal candidate for initiating our students into the art of historical detection.

为什么要讲授约翰·史密斯和风中奇缘?

Why Teach About John Smith and Pocahontas?

一个可管理的历史问题来开始你的课程。风中奇缘/约翰·史密斯的救援故事是开始历史思维教学的一种引人注目的方式。尽管对这一事件的解释工作并不缺乏,但实际的文献记录却出奇地少。从本质上讲,这意味着在几个课时中,您的学生可以遇到引发这场辩论的主要来源。通过阅读约翰史密斯的两种相互矛盾的叙述,学生们立即被推入争论的中心,面临着一个不容易解决的历史问题。在评估了这一事件背后的主要文件后,学生们可以回到教科书的叙述中,并以新的眼光来看待它:“当他们甚至不清楚这件事是否发生时,他们怎么能写出如此确定的东西?!”

A Manageable Historical Problem to Start Your Course. The Pocahontas/John Smith rescue story is a compelling way to start teaching for historical thinking. While there is no shortage of interpretive work that has been done on the event, the actual documentary record is surprisingly thin. Essentially what this means is that over a few class periods, your students can encounter the main sources that fuel this debate. By reading John Smith’s two conflicting accounts, students are immediately thrust into the center of the controversy and confronted with a historical problem that is not easily solved. Having evaluated the primary documents behind this event, students can return to their textbook’s narrative and look at it through new eyes: “How can they write something with such certainty when it’s not even clear that it happened?!”

将历史呈现为一系列有待探索的问题,而不是一组需要记忆的故事,对您的学生来说可能是一种新的体验。约翰·史密斯/风中奇缘问题的早期殖民背景意味着,从课程一开始,学生就可以将历史视为与他们许多人期望的不同的事业。识别并解决一个历史问题,包括指导性问题、多种多样且相互矛盾的来源,并且没有单一的正确答案挑战了学生的观点,即历史是静态的,其中唯一涉及的思考是弄清楚如何记住如此多的材料。虽然波卡洪塔斯是否真的拯救了约翰·史密斯这个狭隘的问题在课程背景下似乎是可以忽略的,但这个问题的有限范围提供了许多教学优势。学生体验历史调查的关键方面,并有丰富的历史思考机会,但他们不会被历史记录淹没。复杂的问题对于新手来说更容易掌握,不需要几十篇文档。

History presented as a series of problems to be explored, rather than a set of stories to be committed to memory, may be a new experience for your students. The early colonial setting of the John Smith/Pocahontas problem means that from the beginning of your course, students can encounter history as a different enterprise than what many of them expect. Identifying and working through a historical problem, complete with guiding questions, varied and contradictory sources, and no single right answer challenges students’ ideas that history is static, where the only thinking involved is figuring out how so much material can be memorized. While the narrow question of whether Pocahontas actually rescued John Smith may seem expendable given the curricular terrain, the question’s limited scope offers many instructional advantages. Students experience key facets of historical investigation with rich opportunities to think historically, but they are not overwhelmed by the historical record. Complex questions are easier for novices to grasp without dozens of documents.

主要来源总是“主要”吗?事实上,调查波卡洪塔斯/约翰·史密斯的故事为培养学生的历史理解提供了多种途径。史密斯故事中的对比挑战了学生对第一手或主要叙述的看法,也就是说,它们始终是理解过去的最可靠来源。学生们常常将第一手资料视为历史真相的反映,而没有意识到有必要审问它们。但在这里,主要来源相互矛盾,这些矛盾不能通过吸引不同观点的不同作家来解决。为什么同一来源约翰史密斯,说不同的话?使用二手历史解释让学生了解更多的复杂性,并挑战了简单化的观念,即第一手资料教给我们的东西比现代历史学家的解释更多。过去几个世纪的学术研究为史密斯的说法提供了另一种解释,即这一事件对波瓦坦人可能意味着什么,遗憾的是,波瓦坦人没有留下自己的书面记录。

Are Primary Sources Always “Primary”? Indeed, investigating the Pocahontas/John Smith story offers multiple avenues to developing students’ historical understanding. The contrast in Smith’s stories challenges students’ ideas about first-hand or primary accounts—that is, that they are always the most reliable source for understanding the past. Often students privilege primary sources as reflections of historical truth and don’t recognize the need to interrogate them. But here, the primary sources contradict one another, and these contradictions cannot be resolved by appealing to different writers with different perspectives. Why does the same source, John Smith, say different things? Working with the secondary historical interpretations introduces students to more complexity and challenges the simplistic notion that primary sources teach us more than the interpretations of modern-day historians. Scholarship done over the past few centuries provides alternative explanations to Smith’s for what this event may have meant to the Powhatan, who, alas, left no written records of their own.

从已知开始。最后,话题的熟悉度是另一大优势。很少有学生没有听说过波卡洪塔斯,或者无法背诵约翰·史密斯/波卡洪塔斯故事的某些版本。这种熟悉意味着学生可能会对这个话题和问题感兴趣,并对历史学家仍在争论这个事实感到惊讶。当他们讨论学生已经知道的主题时,使用相互矛盾的来源会更容易。一旦学生们意识到他们所听到的故事可能更多的是神话而不是历史,关于我们如何了解过去的问题就具有了新的意义。历史不再是令人麻木的事实清单,而是邀请人们加入关于证据和论证的激烈辩论。

Starting with the Known. Finally, the topic’s familiarity is another big advantage. It is the rare student who hasn’t heard of Pocahontas or who cannot recite some version of the John Smith/Pocahontas story. This familiarity means that students are likely to be interested in the topic and problem, and be surprised by the fact that historians are still arguing about it. It is easier to work with contradictory sources when they take up a topic that students already know. Once students realize that the story they’ve been told may be more myth than history, questions about how we know the past take on new meaning. Instead of a numbing list of facts, history becomes an invitation to join a raucous debate about evidence and argument.

您将如何使用这些材料?

How Might You Use These Materials?

场景 1(1-2 小时课程)。波卡洪塔斯救了约翰·史密斯吗?使用这些资源和工具让学生阅读和分析多个账户,以就救援的可能性提出基于证据的论证。

Scenario 1 (1–2 Hour Lesson). Did Pocahontas rescue John Smith? Use these sources and tools to engage students in reading and analyzing multiple accounts to create an evidence-based argument about the likelihood of the rescue.


CCSS

#1、#9

CCSS

#1, #9


首先询问学生他们对风中奇缘和约翰·史密斯了解多少。找出学生对这些人及其时间的了解,以及他们从哪里学到的。有些人会引用 1995 年迪士尼的《风中奇缘》电影。播放迪士尼版本的救援(DVD 第 25 章,或电影大约 1 分 09 秒)。使用时间线(工具 1.1; 所有工具都位于章节末尾)以及您在美洲探索和殖民方面所做的任何工作,以简要建立所指控事件的相关背景,然后介绍本课的指导性问题:波卡洪塔斯是否拯救了约翰·史密斯?在接下来的几轮中,让两对学生使用文档集和随附的工作表来帮助他们回答这个问题。每轮文件结束后,引导全班讨论。在这次讨论中,重新审视指导性问题,并提示学生用文件中的证据来捍卫他们的答案。聆听学生提出的问题,以强调历史挖掘通常会带来更多问题。

Start off by asking students what they know about Pocahontas and John Smith. Elicit what students know about these individuals and their time, and where they learned it. Some will cite the 1995 Disney Pocahontas film. Show the Disney version of the rescue (Chapter 25 of the DVD, or approximately 1:09 into the movie). Use the timeline (Tool 1.1; all Tools are located at the end of chapters) along with any work you have done on the exploration and colonization of the Americas to briefly establish relevant background to the alleged event, then introduce the lesson’s guiding question: Did Pocahontas rescue John Smith? In successive rounds, have pairs of students work with document sets and accompanying worksheets to help them answer this question. After each round of documents, lead a whole-class discussion. In this discussion, revisit the guiding question and prompt students to defend their answers with evidence from the documents. Listen for questions that students have generated to highlight how historical digging often leads to more questions.

图像

在第一轮中,学生使用史密斯的帐户和随附工具(来源 1.11.2工具 1.2)。当他们工作时,听听学生是否认识到史密斯在两个来源中讲述了截然不同的故事。他们能识别出体现这种差异的短语和细节吗?在第二轮中,学生使用两位历史学家的叙述和随附的工具(来源 1.3、1.4、工具1.3再次注意学生是否注意到这些帐户之间的差异。在可选的第三轮中,学生们将讨论最后两个历史学家的叙述和工具(来源1.5、1.6、工具1.4)。在整个课程中,波卡洪塔斯是否救了约翰·史密斯的问题引导着学生的作业和课堂讨论。最后,学生写下问题的答案,并要求他们使用文档中的证据(例如,直接引用、细节和细节)来支持他们的论点。你可能想通过重温迪士尼电影并要求学生解决历史资料如何挑战该事件的著名动画版本来为写作作业做序言。使用工具 1.5来构建此作业。

In the first round, students work with Smith’s accounts and accompanying tools (Sources 1.1 and 1.2, Tool 1.2). As they work, listen to whether students recognize that Smith tells contrasting stories in the two sources. Can they identify phrases and details that exemplify this difference? In the second round, students work with two historians’ accounts and accompanying tools (Source 1.3, 1.4, Tool 1.3). Again, pay attention to whether students note differences between these accounts. In the optional third round, students tackle the final two historians’ accounts and tools (Source 1.5, 1.6, Tool 1.4). Throughout the entire lesson, the question of whether Pocahontas rescued John Smith guides student work and class discussion. Finally, students write an answer to the question with the requirement that they use evidence (e.g., direct quotes, details, and specifics) from the documents to support their argument. You may want to preface the writing assignment by revisiting the Disney movie and asking students to address how the historical sources challenge the well-known animated version of the event. Use Tool 1.5 to structure this assignment.


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 基于证据的思考和论证
  • Evidence-based thinking and argumentation
  • 质疑消息来源
  • Questioning sources
  • 综合多个账户
  • Synthesizing multiple accounts

场景 2(2-3 小时课程)。历史到底是什么?使用这些资源和工具向学生明确历史调查的一些核心特征、材料和词汇。

Scenario 2 (2–3 Hour Lesson). What is history anyway? Use these sources and tools to make explicit for your students some core features, materials, and vocabulary of historical investigation.


CCSS

#9

CCSS

#9


复制场景 1,开始将有关历史本质的直接指导融入到您的课程中。这种额外的指导在学生完成文档分析之后但在写最终论文之前效果最好,尽管它可能会在每个步骤之后整合。

Replicating Scenario 1, begin to integrate direct instruction about the nature of history into your lessons. This additional instruction works best after students have completed the document analysis rounds but before they write their final essay, although it may be integrated after each step.

您可以教您的学生文档集 1 和文档集 2(即次要来源和主要来源)之间的区别。你可以定义“来源”、“证据”和“解释”。您可以回顾一下学生们对本课程的指导性问题变得更加聪明的过程,其中包括阅读、分析和综合多个帐户;用证据支持断言;并询问消息来源和他们自己,以确定他们还想知道什么或他们确实不知道什么。指出历史学家对发生的事情及其含义提出问题。并帮助学生认识到历史调查是一个递归过程,人们必须不断根据现有证据检查主张,并且绝对答案并不总是可能的。

You might teach your students about the difference between Document Sets 1 and 2, i.e., secondary and primary sources. You could define “source,” “evidence,” and “interpretation.” You can review the students’ process of getting smarter about this lesson’s guiding question, which included reading, analyzing, and synthesizing the multiple accounts; backing up assertions with evidence; and asking questions of the sources and of themselves to pinpoint what else they would like to know or what they indeed don’t know. Point out that historians ask questions about what happened and what it meant. And help students recognize that historical investigation is a recursive process, where one has to continually check claims against the available evidence, and absolute answers are not always possible.

图像

为了检查理解情况,学生可以像场景 1 中那样以书面形式回答问题。或者,他们可以回答以下问题:为什么我们不能确定波卡洪塔斯是否救了约翰·史密斯?至少写下三个原因。

To check for understanding, students can answer the question in writing as they do in Scenario 1. Alternatively, they can address the following question: Why can’t we know for certain whether Pocahontas rescued John Smith? Write down a minimum of three reasons.

  • 对于每个原因,至少写出两个支持该原因的具体细节或引用。
  • For each reason write at least two specific details or quotes that support that reason.
  • 比较来源,至少在两个例子中阐明你的观点。
  • Compare sources to make your point in at least two instances.

学生的回答可以采用段落、论文、脱口秀采访或图形组织等形式。这个问题促使学生思考“做”历史意味着什么以及历史文本在发展历史解释中的作用。

Students’ responses could take the form of a paragraph, essay, talk show interview, or graphic organizer, among other possibilities. This question prompts students to think about what it means to “do” history and the role of historical texts in developing historical interpretations.


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 基于证据的思考和论证
  • Evidence-based thinking and argumentation
  • 质疑消息来源
  • Questioning sources
  • 综合多个账户
  • Synthesizing multiple accounts
  • 建立特定于历史学科的词汇
  • Building vocabulary specific to the historical discipline
  • 确定历史知识是如何产生的
  • Identifying how historical knowledge is produced

场景 3(2-3 小时课程)。神话还是历史,有什么区别?使用这些来源和工具来明确重建过去的证据性质以及这与神话创造的对比。

Scenario 3 (2–3 Hour Lesson). Myth or history, what’s the difference? Use these sources and tools to make explicit the evidentiary nature of reconstructing the past and how this contrasts with myth-making.


CCSS

11–12 #7

CCSS

11–12 #7


学生参与情景 1 中描述的阅读和讨论轮次,体验历史学家必须如何分析和综合多个叙述以创建连贯的论点。然而,在这种情况下,学生随后会分析神话创造的例子,包括迪士尼电影和约翰·查普曼 1840 年悬挂在国会大厦圆形大厅的风中奇缘画作。

Students participate in the reading and discussion rounds described in Scenario 1, experiencing how historians must analyze and synthesize multiple accounts to create coherent arguments. However, in this scenario, students subsequently analyze examples of myth-making, including the Disney movie and John Chapman’s 1840 painting of Pocahontas that hangs in the Capitol Rotunda.

仔细观看每件艺术作品后,学生会考虑以下问题:使用了哪些符号?风中奇缘的这一形象中蕴藏着哪些更大的信息(无论是对当代观众还是现在的观众)?风中奇缘的这种表现有什么目的(无论是在其创作时还是现在)?在全班活动中,引导学生制作图表,比较历史与神话。请参阅 David Lowenthal 的文章“Fabricating Heritage”,以帮助您考虑这种比较可能是什么样子。20

After looking carefully at each artistic piece, students consider the questions: What symbols are used? What larger messages (both to its contemporary audience and present-day audience) are embedded in this representation of Pocahontas? What purposes does this representation of Pocahontas serve (both at the time of its creation and present day)? In a whole-class activity, guide students in making a chart comparing history to myth. See David Lowenthal’s essay “Fabricating Heritage” for help in considering what this comparison might look like.20

图像


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 神话与历史的区别
  • Distinguishing between myth and history
  • 仔细分析纪念碑和公共历史
  • Close analysis of memorials and public history

来源和工具

Sources and Tools

资料来源1.1:“真实关系” (改编

SOURCE 1.1: “TRUE RELATION” (ADAPTED)


注:这些是约翰·史密斯自己对所发生事件的描述。

Note: These are John Smith’s own words about what happened.

到达韦罗科莫科时,他们的皇帝骄傲地躺在一张一英尺高的床架上,上面铺着十到十二张垫子……神情严肃而威严让我钦佩不已……

Arriving at Werowocomoco, their emperor proudly lying upon a bedstead a foot high upon ten or twelve mats … with such grave and majestical countenance, as drove me into admiration….

他用好话和丰盛的食物热情地欢迎了我,向我保证他的友谊,并保证我在四天内获得自由……。他问我我们来这里的原因……问为什么我们乘船走得更远……。他答应给我我想要吃的东西,我们应该为他制造斧子和铜,并且任何人都不应该打扰我们。这个要求我答应了。因此,他尽了最大的善意,试图让我满意,然后送我回家。

He kindly welcomed me with good words and great platters of sundry victuals, assuring me his friendship, and my liberty within four days…. He asked me the cause of our coming … demanded why we went further with our boat…. He promised to give me what I wanted to feed us, hatchets and copper we should make him, and none should disturb us. This request I promised to perform. And thus having all the kindness he could devise, sought to content me, he sent me home.


资料来源:摘录自约翰·史密斯 (John Smith) (1608),自弗吉尼亚州首次种植殖民地以来发生的此类事件和值得注意的事故的真实关系。在《早期弗吉尼亚的叙述》中,1606-1625 年,编辑。LG 加德纳(纽约:查尔斯·斯克里布纳之子,1907 年),48、50。

Source: Excerpt adapted from John Smith (1608), A true relation of such occurrences and accidents of note as hath happened in Virginia since the first planting of that colony. In Narratives of Early Virginia, 1606–1625, ed. L. G. Gardiner (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1907), 48, 50.

在线传真版可在www.americanjourneys.org/aj-074/获取

Online facsimile edition available at www.americanjourneys.org/aj-074/


字库

WORD BANK


皇帝——统治者、国王

emperor—ruler, king

面容——面容

countenance—face

食物——食物

victuals—foods


(原来的)

(Original)

到达韦拉莫科科时,他们的皇帝自豪地躺在一张高一英尺的床榻上,上面有十个或十二个马特斯……他的面容如此严肃而威严,让我钦佩不已…… 他用善意的言辞和丰盛的各种食物热情地欢迎了我,向我保证了他的友谊和我在四天内的自由……。熙问我我们来的原因……质问为什么我们带着我们的船走得更远……。

Arriving at Weramocomoco, their emperour proudly lying uppon a Bedstead a foote high upon tenne or twelve Mattes … with such a grave and majesticall countenance, as drave me into admiration…. hee kindly welcomed me with good wordes, and great Platters of sundrie victuals, assuring mee his friendship, and my libertie within foure days…. Hee asked mee the cause of our comming … demaunded why we went further with our Boate….

……他答应给我玉米、鹿肉,或者我想吃的东西:斧头和铜应该让他,没有人应该打扰我们。我答应执行这个请求:因此,他尽了一切善意,试图满足我,他送我回家……。

… Hee promised to give me Corne, Venison, or what I wanted to feede us: Hatchets and Copper wee should make him, and none should disturbe us. This request I promised to performe: and thus, having with all the kindnes hee could devise, sought to content me, hee sent me home….

 

 

资料来源1.2:“通史” (改编

SOURCE 1.2: “GENERAL HISTORY” (ADAPTED)


注:这些是约翰·史密斯(John Smith)根据他的经历的后期版本讲述的所发生的事情。

Note: These are John Smith’s words about what happened from a later version of his experiences.

最后,他们把[史密斯]带到了梅罗诺科科科,他们的皇帝波瓦坦就在那里。当他进来时,所有的人都大声喊叫……并且……以他们能做到的最野蛮的方式招待了他,并进行了长时间的磋商。但结论是,两块巨大的石头被带到了波瓦坦面前。然后,尽可能多的人把手放在他身上,把他拖到他们身边,然后把他的头放在上面,并准备好用棍棒敲打他的大脑。国王最亲爱的女儿波卡洪塔斯(Pocahontas)在恳求无济于事时,将他的头抱在怀里,并把自己的头放在他的身上,以挽救他的生命皇帝很满意史密斯能住在那里。

At last they brought [Smith] to Meronocomoco, where was Powhatan their Emperor. At his entrance, all the people gave a great shout … and … having feasted him after their best barbarous manner they could, a long consultation was held. But the conclusion was, two great stones were brought before Powhatan. Then, as many as could laid hands upon him, dragged him to them, and thereon laid his head, and being ready with their clubs, to beat out his brains. Pocahontas, the King’s dearest daughter, when no entreaty could prevail, got his head in her arms, and laid down her own upon his to save him from death; whereat the Emperor was contented Smith should live.

两天后,波瓦坦以他所能做到的最可怕的方式伪装自己,导致史密斯船长被带到树林里的一所大房子里,并在火边的垫子上独自留下……那么,波瓦坦,更像是一个魔鬼而不是一个人,来到他身边,告诉他他们是如何成为朋友的,不久他就应该去詹姆斯敦,送他两把大枪和一块磨石,为此他将永远把他视为儿子……

Two days after, Powhatan having disguised himself in the most fearful manner he could, caused Captain Smith to be brought forth to a great house in the woods, and there upon a mat by the fire to be left alone … then, Powhatan, more like a devil than a man, came unto him and told him how they were friends, and presently he should go to Jamestown, to send him two great guns, and a grindstone, for which he would forever esteem him as a son….


资料来源:摘录自约翰·史密斯 (John Smith) (1624),《弗吉尼亚、新英格兰和夏季群岛通史》。约翰·史密斯船长全集(1580-1631),卷。2,编辑,PL Barbour(教堂山:北卡罗来纳大学出版社,1986 年),151。

Source: Excerpt adapted from John Smith (1624), General History of Virginia, New England and the Summer Isles. In The Complete Works of Captain John Smith (1580–1631), Vol. 2, ed., P. L. Barbour (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1986), 151.

也可在线访问http://www.virtualjamestown.org/firsthand.html

Also available online at http://www.virtualjamestown.org/firsthand.html


字库

WORD BANK


咨询—讨论

consultation—discussion

恳求——请求、恳求

entreaty—request, plea

占上风——成功

prevail—succeed

尊重——价值、尊重

esteem—value, respect


(原来的)

(Original)

最后他们把他带到了梅罗诺科科科,那里是他们的皇帝波瓦坦…… 当他进入国王面前时,所有的人都大声喊叫……并且……以他们能做到的最好的野蛮方式招待了他,进行了长时间的协商,但结论是,两块大石头被带到了波瓦坦面前:然后,作为许多人都可以把手放在他身上,把他拖到他们身边,然后把他的头放在上面,并准备好用棍棒敲打他的大脑,波卡洪塔斯,国王最亲爱的女儿,当没有恳求成功时,把他的头插进了她的身体里。武器,并把自己的武器放在他身上以拯救他免于死亡;皇帝对自己的生活感到满意……

At last they brought him to Meronocomoco, where was Powhatan their Emperor…. At his entrance before the King, all the people gave a great shout … and … having feasted him after their best barbarous manner they could, a long consultation was held, but the conclusion was, two great stones were brought before Powhatan: then, as many as could layd hands on him, dragged him to them, and thereon laid his head, and being ready with their clubs, to beate out his braines, Pocahontas, the Kings dearest daughter, when no intreaty could prevaile, got his head in her armes, and laid her owne upon his to save him from death; whereat the Emperour was contented he should live….

两天后,波瓦坦以他所能做到的最可怕的方式伪装自己,导致史密斯上尉被带到树林里的一所大房子里,并独自留在火边的一张垫子上……然后波瓦坦更像是一个魔鬼然后一个人……来到他面前,告诉他现在他们是朋友了,不久他就应该去詹姆斯敦,送他两把大枪和一块磨石,为此他会……永远把他当作自己的儿子……。

Two dayes after, Powhatan having disguised himselfe in the most fearefullest manner he could, caused Captaine Smith to be brought forth to a great house in the woods, and there upon a mat by the fire to be left alone … then Powhatan more like a devill then a man … came unto him and told him now they were friends, and presently he should goe to James towne, to send him two great gunnes, and a gryndstone, for which he would … for ever esteeme him as his sonne….

 

 

资料来源1.3:“A DAMS 的解释”(改编

SOURCE 1.3: “ADAMS’S INTERPRETATION” (ADAPTED)


注:以下是一位历史学家如何解释约翰·史密斯的两个叙述。

Note: Here is how one historian interprets John Smith’s two accounts.

约翰·史密斯的两个完全不同的版本并不匹配。后者《弗吉尼亚通史》夸大了《真实关系》中的很多细节,并提出了史密斯在两本出版16年里从未提及过的新信息。

John Smith’s two completely different versions don’t match up. The later one, A General History of Virginia, exaggerates a lot of details in A True Relation, and brings up new information Smith never mentioned in the 16 years between the publication of the two.

当史密斯在《真实的关系》中描述他的被囚禁(1607-1608 年冬天)时,他说波瓦坦善良而慷慨。他说他没有理由担心自己的生命安全。(这证明史密斯认为怀疑波瓦坦的善意是错误的。)另外,史密斯在《真实的关系》中从未提到过波卡洪塔斯。所以,有思想的人都无法相信。

When Smith describes his captivity (winter of 1607–1608) in A True Relation, he says Powhatan was kind and generous. He says he found no cause to fear for his life. (This proves Smith thought it was wrong to doubt Powhatan’s goodwill.) Plus, Smith never mentioned Pocahontas in A True Relation. Therefore, a thinking person can’t believe it.

《真实的关系》提到波卡洪塔斯于 1608 年晚些时候来到詹姆斯敦。史密斯说他送给她礼物以回报她父亲的善意。他难道不会感谢她救了他的命吗(如果真的发生了)?

A True Relation mentions Pocahontas coming to Jamestown later in 1608. Smith says he gave her gifts in return for her father’s kindness. Wouldn’t he have been thanking her for saving his life (if it happened)?

最后,史密斯在 1612 年(在《弗吉尼亚地图》中)写道,当他被囚禁时,他亲眼目睹了部落实行的处决方法。他描述了一个囚犯的头被放在一块献祭的石头上,而“一个人用棍棒敲打他们的大脑”。他在这里没有提及自己的经历,这听起来很像发生在他身上的事情,这不是很奇怪吗?

Finally, Smith wrote in 1612 (in A Map of Virginia) that while he was in captivity he witnessed a method of execution practiced by the tribe. He describes a prisoner’s head being placed on a sacrificing stone, while “one with clubs beats out their brains.” Isn’t it rather odd that he didn’t mention his own experience here, since it sounds just like what happened to him?


资料来源:摘要改编自 Henry Adams(1867 年 1 月),“Captain John Smith”,The North American Review 104 (214)。

Source: Summary adapted from Henry Adams (1867, January), “Captain John Smith,” The North American Review 104 (214).

 

 

资料来源1.4:“L EMAY的解释” (改编

SOURCE 1.4: “LEMAYS INTERPRETATION” (ADAPTED)


注:以下是另一位历史学家如何解释约翰·史密斯的记载。

Note: Here is how another historian interprets John Smith’s accounts.

约翰·史密斯没有理由撒谎。在他所有其他有关本土习俗和地理的著作中,他都非常准确和善于观察。在他被囚禁后的 250 年间,没有人质疑他的故事。

John Smith had no reason to lie. In all of his other writing about native customs and geography, he is very accurate and observant. For 250 years after his captivity, no one questioned his story.

这两个版本不同的原因是它们的目的不同。在《真实的关系》中,史密斯并不想吹嘘他的冒险经历;他只是想吹嘘自己的经历。他想让读者了解弗吉尼亚的土地和人民。在《通史》中,他的目标是促进弗吉尼亚的殖民化(添加的故事可能会让人们对弗吉尼亚公司的活动感兴趣)。

The reason the two versions differ is that their purpose is different. In A True Relation, Smith didn’t want to brag about his adventures; he wanted to inform readers about the land and people of Virginia. In the General History, his goal was to promote colonization in Virginia (and added stories might get people interested in the activities of the Virginia Company).

对于那些说史密斯直到 1624 年才提到波卡洪塔斯的勇敢的批评家——在她的一些名气提高了他的地位之后——他确实在她来英国之前写过关于她的事。1616年,史密斯写信给安妮女王,告诉她波卡洪塔斯的勇敢和其他罕见的品质,他描述了波卡洪塔斯如何将他从波瓦坦手中救出,以及她如何使整个詹姆斯敦免于饥饿。

And to those critics who say Smith never mentioned Pocahontas’s bravery until 1624—after some of her fame would enhance his status—he did write about her before she came to England. In 1616, Smith wrote to Queen Anne to tell her of Pocahontas’s bravery and other rare qualities, and he described how Pocahontas rescued him from Powhatan, and how she saved all Jamestown from starvation.

毫无疑问,该事件确实发生了。史密斯可能误解了整件事的含义。我认为这可能是一种仪式性的死亡和重生,波卡洪塔斯充当了他对印度身份的支持者。

There is no doubt that the event happened. Smith may have misinterpreted what the whole thing meant. I think it was probably a ritualistic death and rebirth, with Pocahontas acting as his sponsor into Indian identity.


资料来源:摘要改编自 JA Leo Lemay,《约翰·史密斯船长的美国梦》(夏洛茨维尔:弗吉尼亚大学出版社,1991 年)。

Source: Summary adapted from J. A. Leo Lemay, The American Dream of Captain John Smith (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1991).


字库

WORD BANK


殖民——定居、统治

colonization—settlement, domination

被误解——被误解,有错误的想法

misinterpreted—misunderstood, got the wrong idea about


资料来源1.5:“刘易斯解释”(改编

SOURCE 1.5: “LEWIS’S INTERPRETATION” (ADAPTED)


注:这是另一位历史学家对这些事件的解释。

Note: Here is how another historian interprets these events.

为什么弗吉尼亚公司的其他写日记的成员都没有写过波卡洪塔斯救了史密斯的命?(1608 年,十名弗吉尼亚公司成员写了日记。)如果史密斯回到詹姆斯敦并分享他的故事,肯定会有人写下这件事。

Why is it that none of the other members of the Virginia Company who kept diaries ever wrote about Pocahontas saving Smith’s life? (Ten fellow Virginia company members kept journals in 1608.) Surely someone would have written about it if Smith came back to Jamestown and shared his story.

因此,直到 1617 年,当她成为伦敦媒体的一大事件时,英格兰才听说过她。她是一位“公主”(“国王”波瓦坦的女儿),也是第一位访问英国的印度女性。由于她皈依了基督教,教会高层以及国王(詹姆斯一世)和王后(安妮)都关注她。

Thus, no one in England had ever heard of her until 1617 when she was a big media event in London. She was a “princess” (daughter of “King” Powhatan), and the first Indian woman to visit England. Because she had converted to Christianity, people high up in the church, as well as the King (James I) and Queen (Anne), paid attention to her.

在这一切发生的同时,约翰·史密斯出版了新版《真实关系》,其中关于他被捕的部分现在有了脚注。这些笔记提到波卡洪塔斯扑向史密斯请求释放他,而她的父亲屈服于她的请求。史密斯甚至因向风中奇缘介绍英语和圣经而受到赞誉。

While all this was going on, John Smith published a new edition of A True Relation that now had footnotes in the part about his capture. These notes mention Pocahontas throwing herself on Smith to beg his release, and her father giving in to her request. Smith even goes on to take credit for introducing Pocahontas to the English language and the Bible.

1624年,史密斯在他的《通史》中完善了这个故事。这个版本扩展了营救他的细节,称波卡洪塔斯冒着生命危险救了他。他还描述了波瓦坦酋长为詹姆斯敦殖民者提供印第安向导。那个想杀死史密斯的酋长现在会试图帮助他吗?

In 1624, Smith polished this story in his General History. This version expands the details of his rescue, saying Pocahontas risked her life to save his. He also describes Chief Powhatan providing the Jamestown colonists with Indian guides. Would the same chief who wanted to kill Smith now try to help him?


资料来源:摘要改编自 Paul Lewis,《The Great Rogue:John Smith 传记》(纽约:David McKay Company,1966 年)。

Source: Summary adapted from Paul Lewis, The Great Rogue: A Biography of John Smith (New York: David McKay Company, 1966).

 

 

资料来源1.6:“B ARBOUR 的解释”(修订

SOURCE 1.6: “BARBOUR’S INTERPRETATION” (ADAPTED)


注:以下是另一位学者对争议事件的解读。

Note: Here is how another scholar interprets the disputed event.

把两块大石头搬进来,迫使约翰·史密斯在它们上面伸开身体,在史密斯看来,他就像即将被处决一样。当一名年轻女孩(风中奇缘)跪下并将头放在史密斯身上时,他被释放了。在他看来,她救了他的命。

The bringing in of two big stones, and forcing John Smith to stretch out on them, seemed to Smith like he was about to be executed. When a young girl (Pocahontas) knelt and placed her head on Smith, he was released. The way he saw it, she saved his life.

几乎可以肯定发生的事情是,史密斯是一个仪式的中心,类似于部落中的小男孩在进入成年之前所经历的仪式。他们假装被处决或死亡,然后重生为男人。波卡洪塔斯被预先选为他的保护者。她实际上并没有救他的命,因为波瓦坦人并没有真的要杀他。

What almost certainly happened was that Smith was the center of a ritual similar to what young boys in the tribe went through before entering manhood. They have a pretend execution or death and then are reborn as men. Pocahontas was preselected to be his protector. She did not actually save his life because the Powhatan were not really going to kill him.


资料来源:摘要改编自菲利普·巴伯 (Philip Barbour) 的《波卡洪塔斯和她的世界》(Pocahontas and Her World)(波士顿:霍顿·米夫林 (Houghton Mifflin),1969 年)。

Source: Summary adapted from Philip Barbour, Pocahontas and Her World (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1969).


字库

WORD BANK


仪式——习俗、仪式

ritual—custom, ceremony


工具1.1 :波卡洪塔斯约翰·史密斯相关的事件时间线

TOOL 1.1: TIMELINE OF EVENTS RELATED TO POCAHONTAS AND JOHN SMITH


图像

工具1.2比较史密斯账户_

TOOL 1.2: COMPARING SMITH’S ACCOUNTS


  1. 史密斯关于 1607 年 12 月被囚禁的两段叙述有哪些不同的事实?(使用下面的空间回答或在本表背面创建维恩图。)









    真实关系来源 1.1)说:









    通史来源 1.2)说:









  2. What are the different facts in Smith’s two accounts of his captivity in December 1607? (Use the space below to answer or create a Venn diagram on the back of this sheet.)









    A True Relation (Source 1.1) says:









    General History (Source 1.2) says:









  3. 史密斯为什么要补充他之前的故事呢?









  4. Why would Smith add on to his earlier story?









  5. 他为什么会撒谎或夸大并发明新信息?









  6. Why might he lie or exaggerate and invent new information?









  7. 他为什么不对这个故事撒谎呢?
  8. Why wouldn’t he lie about the story?

工具1.3比较历史学家史密斯_

TOOL 1.3: COMPARING HISTORIANS AND SMITH


假设史密斯最新叙述(《弗吉尼亚通史》 )中的基本事实(尽管不一定是对事实的解释)是真实的,请在下面记录该段落中事实的“逐个”描述:

Assuming that the basic facts (though not necessarily the interpretation of the facts) in Smith’s latest account (the General History of Virginia) are true, record below a “play-by-play” description of the facts in the passage:

  1.  









  2.  









  3.  









  4.  









  5.  









  6.  









  7.  









  8.  









  9.  
  10.  

 

 

哪些历史学家相信上述基本顺序确实发生过?

Which historians believe that the basic sequence above did occur?

 

 

描述他们认为事实(上述)的含义:

Describe what they think the facts (above) mean:

  1. 历史学家___________________相信……









  2. Historian ___________________ believes …









  3. 历史学家___________________相信……
  4. Historian ___________________ believes …

工具1.4比较历史学家史密斯_

TOOL 1.4: COMPARING HISTORIANS AND SMITH


请参阅史密斯最新报道中对事实的“逐场”描述。将其与刘易斯和巴伯对这些事实的解释进行比较。

Refer to the “play-by-play” description of the facts in Smith’s latest account. Compare this to Lewis’s and Barbour’s interpretations of these facts.

 

 

哪些历史学家相信上述基本顺序确实发生过?

Which historians believe that the basic sequence above did occur?

 

 

 

 

描述他们认为事实(上述)的含义:

Describe what they think the facts (above) mean:

  1. 历史学家___________________相信……









  2. Historian ___________________ believes …









  3. 历史学家___________________相信……
  4. Historian ___________________ believes …

 

 

工具1.5 :分析文章嘉康塔斯拯救约翰·史密斯_ _ _

TOOL 1.5: ANALYTICAL ESSAY DID POCAHONTAS SAVE JOHN SMITH?


1. 再次观看迪士尼短片《风中奇缘》拯救约翰·史密斯。迪士尼声称其电影“负责任、准确且尊重”。你同意?为什么或者为什么不?在论文中解释你的立场。使用文档中的证据来支持您对此影片剪辑的分析。

1. Watch the Disney clip of Pocahontas saving John Smith again. Disney claims that its film is “responsible, accurate, and respectful.” Do you agree? Why or why not? Explain your position in an essay. Use evidence from the documents to support your analysis of this film clip.

2. 写下你的论文大纲并与你的老师分享。

2. Write an outline of your essay and share it with your teacher.

  1. 包括明确的立场
  2. Include a clear position.
  3. 列出您想提出的观点来支持您的立场。
  4. List the points you want to make to support your position.
  5. 引用支持你的立场的关键证据。
  6. Cite key pieces of evidence that support your position.

3.写你的论文。

3. Write your essay.

  1. 在介绍性段落中表达您的立场。
  2. Convey your position in the introductory paragraph.
  3. 解释你的观点和证据。
  4. Explain your points and your evidence.
  5. 最后总结一下你的论点。
  6. Conclude with a wrap-up of your argument.

建议资源

Suggested Resources

http://www.virtualjamestown.org/

http://www.virtualjamestown.org/

该网站是弗吉尼亚理工大学和弗吉尼亚大学及其数字历史中心合作创建的,包含丰富的教学资源,包括第一手资料和对当地印第安人的视频采访。

This site, created through collaboration between Virginia Tech and the University of Virginia and its Center for Digital History, includes a rich set of teaching and learning resources, including first-hand accounts and video interviews with local Indians.

http://historicjamestowne.org/

http://historicjamestowne.org/

该网站由弗吉尼亚古物保护协会和国家公园管理局维护,包括早期殖民者的传记以及让学生了解正在进行的考古挖掘和该地区地理的教学资源。

Maintained by the Association for the Preservation of Virginia’s Antiquities and the National Park Service, this site includes biographies of the early colonists and teaching resources for involving students with the ongoing archeological digs and the area’s geography.

http://www.apva.org/jr.html

http://www.apva.org/jr.html

这是詹姆斯敦遗址考古工作的主页,由弗吉尼亚古物保护协会维护。它包括有关正在进行的挖掘的展览和更新以及与詹姆斯敦相关的简要历史。

Maintained by the Association for the Preservation of Virginia’s Antiquities, this is the home page for the archeological efforts at the Jamestown site. It includes exhibits and updates about the ongoing digs and brief histories relevant to Jamestown.

http://chnm.gmu.edu/loudountah/exploresources.php

http://chnm.gmu.edu/loudountah/exploresources.php

一个独特的网站,展示了一位小学教师与她的学生一起规划和使用约翰·史密斯 1612 年弗吉尼亚地图的视频,以及一位学者对该地图的分析。

A unique site that shows a video of an elementary teacher planning and using John Smith’s 1612 map of Virginia with her students as well as a scholar’s analysis of the map.

http://xroads.virginia.edu/~CAP/POCA/POC-home.html

http://xroads.virginia.edu/~CAP/POCA/POC-home.html

该网站主要关注风中奇缘以及她随时间的表现。在这里您可以找到洗礼画。

This site focuses on Pocahontas and representations of her over time. Here you can find the Baptism painting.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/pocahontas

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/pocahontas

这个 PBS 视频《风中奇缘揭晓》的姊妹网站包括“詹姆斯敦科学”专题、对历史学家和潮水印第安酋长的采访,以及风中奇缘形象变化的互动展览。

This companion site to the PBS video Pocahontas Revealed includes a feature on the “science of Jamestown,” interviews with a historian and a Tidewater Indian chief, and an interactive exhibit of the changing images of Pocahontas.

http://digital.lib.lehigh.edu/Trial/pocahontas/index.php

http://digital.lib.lehigh.edu/trial/pocahontas/index.php

该网站由一位英语教授维护档案,拥有有关风中奇缘的各种资源。

An archive maintained by an English professor, this site has an extensive variety of resources concerning Pocahontas.

http://www.nps.gov/jame/historyculture/index.htm

http://www.nps.gov/jame/historyculture/index.htm

该网站由国家公园管理局维护,包含有关詹姆斯敦及其居民的许多方面的情况说明书。

Maintained by the National Park Service, this site includes fact sheets about many aspects of Jamestown and its residents.

http://www.learner.org/channel/courses/amerhistory/interactives/

http://www.learner.org/channel/courses/amerhistory/interactives/

用户可以将风中奇缘的表现与描述相匹配,然后访问生动的上下文线索将它们放置在时间线上。这项基于网络的互动活动使用风中奇缘不断变化的表现形式来引入时间顺序思维。

Users can match representations of Pocahontas with descriptions and then access lively contextual clues to place them on a timeline. This interactive web-based activity uses changing representations of Pocahontas to introduce chronological thinking.

 

 


第2章

CHAPTER 2


“挺身而出”还是逃离现场?

“Standing Tall” or Fleeing the Scene?

雅各布·道格拉斯和山姆·温伯格

Jacob Douglas and Sam Wineburg

图像

科尼利厄斯·蒂博特,《列克星敦之战》,1790 年。版画。访问http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2004669978/

Cornelius Tiebout, Battle of Lexington, 1790. Engraving. Accessed at http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2004669978/

为了纪念列克星敦战役(“全世界都听到了枪声”)150 周年,美国邮政局发行了一枚 2 美分的纪念邮票(来源2.3)。该邮票于 1925 年发行,描绘了民兵坚决对抗英国优势军队的实线。这张照片描绘了民兵们还击、重新装弹和挑衅地挥舞拳头的各个阶段,展现了美国人自豪地认为是事实的故事的英雄版本。

For the 150th anniversary of the Battle of Lexington—the “shot heard ’round the world”—the U.S. Postal Service produced a two-cent commemorative stamp (Source 2.3). Issued in 1925, the stamp depicts a solid line of Minutemen resolutely facing superior British forces. Portraying the Minutemen in various stages of returning fire, reloading, and defiantly shaking their fists, the image projects a heroic version of the story that Americans had proudly come to regard as fact.

只有一个小问题:该邮票不是基于战斗目击者的描述,而是基于 Henry Sandham 1886 年的一幅绘画。桑德姆的画作是在实际事件发生一个多世纪后完成的(来源 2.2 ),描绘了叛逆的美国人不顾离开列克星敦格林的命令。然而,如果我们看一下该事件的另一幅渲染图,即在事件发生几周后而不是几年后创建的渲染图,就会出现不同的印象。1775 年秋天,一位名叫阿莫斯·杜立特 (Amos Doolittle) 的 21 岁银匠创作了一幅金属雕刻,描绘了那年 4 月发生的遭遇(来源 2.1)。杜立特的蚀刻画中,英国正规军向一群逃跑的民兵开枪,列克星敦民兵中没有一个人表现出丝毫抵抗的迹象。杜立特版画中的殖民者在面对压倒性的困难时并没有昂首挺胸。他们正在逃命。

There was only one little problem: The stamp was based not on eyewitness accounts of the battle, but on an 1886 painting by Henry Sandham. Completed well over a century after the actual event (Source 2.2), Sandham’s painting showed rebellious Americans defying orders to leave Lexington Green. However, if we look at another rendering of the event, one created weeks after the event, not years, a different impression emerges. In the fall of 1775, a 21-year-old silversmith named Amos Doolittle created a metal engraving depicting the encounter that had taken place that April (Source 2.1). Doolittle’s etching has British regulars firing on a ragtag group of fleeing Minutemen, with not a single member of the Lexington militia showing the slightest sign of resistance. The colonists in Doolittle’s engraving are not standing tall in the face of overwhelming odds. They are fleeing for their lives.

这两幅图像之间的鲜明对比——第一幅承载了美国邮政服务的分量和合法性,第二幅由康涅狄格州一位不起眼的工匠绘制——给我们带来了一个关键问题:4 月 19 日早上在列克星敦格林发生了什么, 1775? 这场遭遇,用“战斗”来形容还合适吗?称之为“大屠杀”或者甚至是不幸但血腥的误解会更好吗?为了简单起见,是否中立地将这一事件称为“列克星敦事件”?

The striking contrast between these two images—the first carrying the weight and legitimacy of the United States Postal Service, the second drawn by an obscure Connecticut craftsman—brings us to a critical question: What happened at Lexington Green on the morning of April 19, 1775? Is it even appropriate to call this encounter a “battle”? Would it be better labeled a “massacre” or even an unfortunate but bloody misunderstanding? Would it be preferable, for simplicity’s sake, to refer to this event neutrally as the “Incident at Lexington”?

史学争论

Historiographical Debate

事件发生约 50 年后,列克星敦到底发生了什么的问题才浮出水面,当时列克星敦和康科德两镇为谁在美国革命中流下了第一批英国人的血而争论不休。1825 年,列克星敦的埃利亚斯·菲尼 (Elias Phinney) 出版了他的《列克星敦战役历史》,试图反驳有关美国第一次抵抗实际上发生在邻近的康科德的说法。菲尼利用事发 50 年后目击者的证词,以与桑德姆 1886 年的画作(以及 1925 年的邮票)一致的方式描述了列克星敦战役。根据菲尼的叙述,民兵队长约翰·帕克命令“每个人都坚守阵地”,并威胁要射杀第一个离开岗位的人。芬尼随后列出了每一位坚守阵地并向英军还击的民兵,其中包括几名受伤后继续战斗的民兵。难怪亨利·桑德姆 1886 年的画作与菲尼的作品相对应:它是由列克星敦历史学会委托创作的,该协会向桑德姆支付了 4 美元,1

The question of what really happened at Lexington came to light some 50 years after the event as the towns of Lexington and Concord fought over the distinction of who spilled the first British blood of the American Revolution. In 1825, Lexington’s Elias Phinney published his History of the Battle at Lexington, an effort to refute claims that the first American resistance actually occurred at neighboring Concord. Using depositions of eyewitnesses taken 50 years after the fact, Phinney describes the Battle of Lexington in ways consistent with Sandham’s 1886 painting (and, for that matter, the 1925 postage stamp). According to Phinney’s account, John Parker, the Minutemen’s captain, ordered “every man to stand his ground” and threatened to shoot the first man who left his post. Phinney then lists each Minuteman who stood his ground and returned fire on the British, including several who continued fighting after sustaining wounds. No wonder, then, that Henry Sandham’s 1886 painting corresponds to Phinney’s work: It was commissioned by the Lexington Historical Society, which paid Sandham $4,000 for an illustration that portrayed Lexington’s sons in a courageous light.1

菲尼的说法七年后,康科德大学的埃兹拉·里普利 (Ezra Ripley) 提出了反驳。里普利认为,对英国人的第一次武装抵抗发生在康科德,列克星敦的民兵从未向英国人还击。相反,他声称英国人一开始开火,列克星敦民兵就陷入混乱(这一描述与 1775 年杜立特的版画相对应)。几乎没有证据支持美国人在列克星敦进行反击的观点。里普利认为,那些确实证实了这一说法的描述是由英国军官做出的,他们不仅在证明美国人已经开枪,而且首先开枪方面拥有既得利益。里普利建议列克星敦事件可以称为大屠杀或混战,但不能称为战斗。相反,他断言美国革命的第一次真正的战斗发生在康科德。2尽管里普利的叙述有其优势,但它几乎不加掩饰地试图为康科德赢得在美国独立战争中第一个反击英国的荣誉,就像菲尼的叙述试图为列克星敦赢得这一荣誉一样。

Seven years after Phinney’s account, Concord’s Ezra Ripley issued a rebuttal. Arguing that the first armed resistance to the British had taken place at Concord, Ripley contended that Lexington’s Minutemen never returned fire on the British. Instead, he claimed that the Lexington militia scattered in disarray as soon as the British started firing (a depiction that corresponds with the 1775 Doolittle engraving). Little evidence existed to support the notion that Americans fought back at Lexington. Those descriptions that did substantiate that claim, Ripley argued, were by British officers who had a vested interest not only in showing that the Americans had fired their weapons, but fired first. Ripley suggested that the incident at Lexington could be called a massacre or a melee, but not a battle. Instead, he asserted that the first real battle of the American Revolution took place at Concord.2 Despite its strengths, Ripley’s account was a thinly veiled attempt to win Concord the honor of being the first to fight back against the British in the American Revolution, just as Phinney’s was an attempt to claim that distinction for Lexington.

近一个世纪后,在马萨诸塞州历史学会的一次会议上,来自波士顿的银行家兼业余历史学家哈罗德·默多克发表了一篇论文,对列克星敦战役的传统描述提出了质疑。他认为,美国人公然抵抗英国进攻的故事是由于“大量可疑证据的积累”逐渐被接受为事实。“传统、传说、曲调和歌曲都在列克星敦故事的重建中发挥了作用。” 3在论证列克星敦发生的事情时,默多克从杜立特的雕刻开始,指出“即使是放大镜也未能显示出该公司的任何成员处于抵抗态度;” 没有任何还击的建议,甚至没有装弹的建议。” 4默多克解释说,随着时间的推移,艺术效果图描绘了美国人的更大程度的抵抗,最终在桑德姆 1886 年的画作中达到顶峰,在这幅画中,殖民者以携带步枪的叛乱者的形象出现。虽然默多克没有向历史证据提供新的信息,但他煞费苦心地详细说明了菲尼的叙述、桑德姆的绘画和其他证据中的差异,例如英国人造成的伤亡非常少(一名表面受伤的士兵和一匹受伤的马)。

Nearly a century later, at a meeting of the Massachusetts Historical Society, Harold Murdock, a banker and amateur historian from Boston, delivered a paper that called into question the traditional account of the Battle of Lexington. The story of Americans defiantly resisting a British advance, he argued, was due to “the accumulation of a mass of questionable evidence” that had gradually become accepted as truth. “Tradition, legend, tune, and song all played their part in the reconstruction of the Lexington story.”3 In making the argument for what happened at Lexington, Murdock began with the Doolittle engraving, noting that “even the magnifying glass fail[ed] to reveal any member of that company in an attitude of resistance; no suggestion of a return fire, or even of loading.”4 Over time, Murdock explained, artistic renderings depicted greater levels of resistance on the part of the Americans, culminating in Sandham’s 1886 painting in which the colonists emerged as musket-toting rebels. While Murdock introduced no new information to the body of historical evidence, he painstakingly detailed the discrepancies in Phinney’s account, Sandham’s painting, and other evidence, such as the remarkably few casualties sustained by the British (one superficially wounded soldier and a wounded horse).

1959 年,亚瑟·图特洛 (Arthur Tourtellot) 用随后几年获得的证据支持了默多克的论点。虽然承认美国人可能实际上向英国人开火,但他指出“美国人的火力在数量上与英国人相差甚远,而且极其不稳定和不规则”——显然不是民兵重新装弹的实线。近距离。5根据这些学者的说法,列克星敦“战役”这个值得纪念邮票的故事似乎更像是神话而不是历史。

In 1959 Arthur Tourtellot supported Murdock’s arguments with evidence that had become available in the intervening years. While conceding that the Americans might have actually fired on the British, he noted that “the American fire did not come close to matching the British in volume, and it was extremely erratic and irregular”—clearly not a solid line of Minutemen reloading their firearms at close range.5 Based on the claims of these scholars, the “Battle” of Lexington, a tale worthy of commemorative postage stamps, would seem to be more myth than history.

主要来源怎么说?诚然,对于 1775 年 4 月 19 日上午列克星敦格林究竟发生了什么仍存在分歧,但共识不是一场史诗般的战斗,而是杜立特 1775 年版画中描绘的混乱撤退。列克星敦民兵本身的主要叙述强化了这个版本。1775 年 4 月 23 日至 25 日,即列克星敦和康科德事件发生几天后,马萨诸塞省议会(一个由殖民地建立的法外管理机构)安排太平绅士(有利于民兵事业)听取来自民兵的证词。那些在列克星敦格林的人。这些证词被送交议会并在英格兰各地发表,试图将殖民地人民描绘成英国军队野蛮行径的无辜受害者。该时期的殖民地法官听取了 97 人的 21 份证词;有些证词只列出了 1 或 2 个人的名字,有些则包含了 30 多名证人的名字。

What Do the Primary Sources Say? To be sure, disagreement remains over what exactly happened on Lexington Green on the morning of April 19, 1775, but the consensus points away from an epic battle and more toward the chaotic retreat depicted in Doolittle’s 1775 engraving. This version is strengthened by the primary accounts of the Lexington Minutemen themselves. On April 23–25, 1775, several days after the events at Lexington and Concord, the Massachusetts Provincial Congress, an extralegal governing body set up by the colonials, arranged for justices of the peace (favorable to the Minutemen’s cause) to take depositions from those present on Lexington Green. These depositions were sent to Parliament and published throughout England in an effort to portray the colonials as innocent victims of the British army’s barbarism. Colonial justices of the period took 21 depositions from 97 individuals; while some of the depositions bore the name of only 1 or 2, some contained the names of over 30 deponents.

一份来自 Nathaniel Mulliken、Philip Russell 和其他 32 名列克星敦民兵成员的证词对列克星敦格林的场景进行了如下描述(参见来源 2.5):

One such deposition, taken from Nathaniel Mulliken, Philip Russell, and 32 other members of the Lexington militia, described the scene at Lexington Green as follows (see Source 2.5):

凌晨五点左右,听到鼓声,我们向阅兵场【列克星敦绿地】走去,很快就发现一大群军队正在向我们行进,我们连的一些人正在参加阅兵式,另一些则已经在阅兵场上。到了那里,连队开始解散,我们背对着英国军队,我们被他们开枪射击,我们的一些人立即死伤,没有人开一枪。据我们所知,在他们向我们开枪之前,我们连的常客就已经向我们开枪了,他们继续开火,直到我们全部逃走。6

About five o’clock in the morning, hearing our drum beat, we proceeded towards the parade [Lexington Green] and soon found that a large body of troops were marching towards us, some of our company were coming up to the parade and others had reached it, at which time the company began to disperse, whilst our backs were turned on the [British] troops, we were fired on by them, and a number of our men were instantly killed and wounded, not a gun was fired by any person in our company on the regulars to our knowledge before they fired on us, and [they] continued firing until we had all made our escape.6

与此时取得的其他证词一样,这份报告坚决认为英国人首先开火,而且不是向民兵阵线开火,而是向背对而逃的四散人群开火。虽然这样的形象并不讨好列克星敦民兵,但它有助于让其他殖民地以及议会成员相信英国军队的残酷行为。尽管这份证词提供了令人信服的证据,但它也可能受到殖民者寻求将自己描绘成单方面屠杀受害者的政治利益的影响。我们应该考虑对同一事件的不同观点。

Like the other depositions taken at this time, the account adamantly held that the British fired first, and not on a firmly planted line of Minutemen, but on a dispersing crowd fleeing with their backs turned. While not flattering to the Lexington militia, such an image would have been useful in convincing the other colonies, as well as members of Parliament, of the cruelty of the British troops. While the deposition presents compelling evidence, it may also have been tainted by the political interests of colonials seeking to portray themselves as victims of a one-sided massacre. We should consider additional perspectives on the same events.

约翰·巴克中尉是英国第四团轻步兵连的成员,也是当天早上在列克星敦格林的军官之一,他在日记中记录了对这些事件的惊人相似的描述(见来源 2.4

Lieutenant John Barker, a member of the British Light Infantry Company of the Fourth Regiment and one of the officers present on Lexington Green that morning, recorded in his diary a surprisingly similar account of these events (see Source 2.4):

19日。两点钟,我们开始行军,涉水穿过一条很长的浅滩,一直到我们中间:走了几英里后,我们带了三四个人去提供情报;在我们路上大约 5 英里处一个叫列克星敦的小镇的这一边,我们听说有大约数百人聚集在一起,打算反对我们并阻止我们继续前进;5点钟我们到达那里,看到有很多人,我相信有200到300人,聚集在镇中心的一个公共场所;我们仍然继续前进,做好了应对攻击的准备,虽然无意攻击他们,但当我们接近他们时,他们开了一两枪,我们的没有任何命令的士兵冲向他们,开枪射击,把他们打跑。他们中的几个人被杀了,我们不知道有多少人,因为他们被困在墙后和树林里…… 然后我们在公共地列队,但遇到了一些困难,这些人太狂野了,他们听不到任何命令。我们在那里等了相当长的时间,最后继续前往康科德。7

19th. At 2 o’clock we began our march by wading through a very long ford up to our middles: after going a few miles we took 3 or 4 people who were going off to give intelligence; about 5 miles on this side of a town called Lexington which lay in our road, we heard there were some hundreds of people collected together intending to oppose us and stop our going on; at 5 o’clock we arrived there and saw a number of people, I believe between 200 and 300, formed on a common in the middle of the town; we still continued advancing, keeping prepared against an attack tho’ without intending to attack them, but on our coming near them they fired one or two shots, upon which our men without any orders rushed in upon them, fired and put ’em to flight; several of them were killed, we cou’d not tell how many because they were got behind walls and into the woods…. We then formed on the Common but with some difficulty, the men were so wild they cou’d hear no orders; we waited a considerable time there and at length proceeded on our way to Concord.7

在查看美国和英国版本的列克星敦格林事件时,我们可能会发现一些差异。例如,每份报告都声称对方先开火,这并不奇怪。但更引人注目的是这些说法的吻合之处:双方都没有描述民兵的重大抵抗。

In looking at both American and British versions of the events at Lexington Green, we might expect some differences. It is not surprising, for instance, that each report claimed that the other fired first. But more striking is where these accounts match up: Neither side describes significant resistance by the Minutemen.

当历史学家试图发现过去发生的事情时,他们依靠佐证,即仔细考虑不同来源之间的联系点。当多个消息来源达成一致时,特别是当它们来自对立双方时,我们可以更好地评估它们的准确性。一名英国军官的日记证实了民兵的证词,这一事实为该事件的这一版本提供了更大的可信度。

When historians try to discover what happened in the past, they rely on corroboration, the careful consideration of points of contact across different sources. When multiple sources agree, particularly when they come from opposing sides, we can take greater stock in their accuracy. The fact that a British officer’s diary corroborates the deposition given by the Minutemen lends greater credibility to this version of the event.

主要来源是提炼成历史课学生教科书叙述的原材料。但神话也渗透进教科书。考虑以下摘自 1963 年美国中学生历史教科书的一段话:

Primary sources are the raw materials that get distilled into the textbook narratives served up to students in history classes. But myth creeps into textbooks as well. Consider the following passage taken from a 1963 American history textbook for middle school students:

1775 年 4 月,马萨诸塞州军事总督盖奇将军派出一支部队前往距离波士顿不远的康科德获取军事补给。在列克星敦,保罗·里维尔举报的少数“陷入困境的农民”挡住了道路。“叛乱分子”被命令驱散。他们坚持自己的立场。英国人齐射,打死八名爱国者。保罗·里维尔向邻近的殖民地传播了这一新暴行的消息。新英格兰的爱国者虽然人数还很少,但现在已经准备好与英国人作战了。8

In April 1775 General Gage, the military governor of Massachusetts, sent out a body of troops to take possession of military supplies at Concord, a short distance from Boston. At Lexington, a handful of “embattled farmers” who had been tipped off by Paul Revere, barred the way. The “rebels” were ordered to disperse. They stood their ground. The English fired a volley of shots that killed eight patriots. Paul Revere spread the news of this new atrocity to the neighboring colonies. The patriots of New England, although still a handful, were now ready to fight the English.8

教科书重复了民兵在被命令解散时“坚守阵地”的说法。然而,民兵们自己的证词和巴克的日记都没有提到民兵们“坚守阵地”。

The textbook repeats the claim that the Minutemen “stood their ground” when ordered to disperse. Yet neither the Minutemen’s own depositions nor Barker’s diary say anything about the Minutemen “standing their ground.”

如果我们看一下另一个来源,即列克星敦格林事件发生时耶鲁大学校长埃兹拉·斯蒂尔斯 (Ezra Stiles) 的日记,我们会对可能发生的事情有更深入的了解(来源 2.6 。根据斯泰尔斯从英军指挥官皮特凯恩少校那里得到的描述,美国殖民者在被命令驱散时确实“坚守阵地”。然而,一旦射击开始,他们就开始逃命。正如斯泰尔斯所记录的:

If we look at yet another source, the diary of Ezra Stiles, the president of Yale College at the time of the events at Lexington Green, we gain a deeper understanding of what may have happened (Source 2.6). According to an account Stiles received from Major Pitcairn, who commanded the British troops, the American colonists did “stand their ground” when they were ordered to disperse. However, once firing commenced, they ran for their lives. As Stiles recorded it:

[皮特凯恩]的说法是这样的——他骑马冲向他们,命令他们散开;他们没有立即行动,他转身命令他的部队撤出,包围他们并解除他们的武装。当他转身时,他看到墙后有一个农民手里拿着一把枪,昙花一现,没有走火;立刻或很快就有两三枪响了。9

[Pitcairn’s] account is this—that riding up to them he ordered them to disperse; which they not doing instantly, he turned about to order his troops so to draw out as to surround and disarm them. As he turned, he saw a gun in a peasant’s hand from behind a wall, flash in the pan without going off; and instantly or very soon two or three guns went off.9

皮特凯恩没有说他首先看到美国人开火。他也没有说,一旦开火,他们就坚守阵地。他所说的是,殖民者违抗了离开列克星敦格林的命令。斯泰尔斯的版本并不一定与巴克或马利肯的版本相矛盾。也许民兵确实坚守阵地,但当枪声响起时,他们可能没有还击就逃跑了。

Pitcairn did not say that he saw the Americans fire first. Nor does he say that once the firing began they stood their ground. What he does say is that the colonists defied an order to quit Lexington Green. Stiles’s version does not necessarily contradict those of Barker or Mulliken. Perhaps the Minutemen did stand their ground, but when shots were fired, they may have fled without returning fire.

关于列克星敦格林事件的悬而未决的问题仍然存在,特别是关于谁开了第一枪。巴克声称,当军队接近绿地时,民兵向英国人“开了一两枪”;民兵辩称,他们在转身时遭到射击。虽然并不奇怪,但这种差异实际上告诉我们更多的是每份文件的目的,而不是所描述的实际事件——在判断文件的可信度时要记住这一点。没有任何文件是凭空写成的。每份文件的历史背景或背景到底什么?

Unanswered questions continue to swirl about the events on Lexington Green, especially concerning who fired the first shot. Barker claimed that as troops approached the Green, the Minutemen “fired one or two shots” at the British; the Minutemen argued that they were fired upon when their backs were turned. While not surprising, the discrepancy actually tells us more about the purpose of each document than the actual events described—a point to keep in mind when judging a document’s trustworthiness. No document is written in a vacuum. What exactly were the historical circumstances, or context, for each document?

我们知道,民兵的声明是省议会向议会和英国人民发出的,希望将自己描绘成英国侵略的无辜受害者,而不是煽动的革命者。就巴克而言,他写日记可能不仅仅是为了记录他内心深处的感受,而是因为如果他必须向上级当局证明自己的行为是正当的,这可能会为他开脱。事实上,在我们与一群历史学家和一群高中生一起使用这些文件进行的一项研究中,其中一位历史学家向我们暗示,巴克可能一直在试图“掩盖他的背后”。夹在两种不讨人喜欢的选择之间——承认他下达了开火命令或承认他失去了对部队的控制——后一种选择更可取。10因此,如果中尉必须为自己辩护以应对发出开枪命令的指控,巴克的日记将提供不在场证据。如果说他有错的话,那也不是因为他下达了开火命令,而是因为他的部下经过三个小时的行军,又累又湿,在遭到射击时还击,这是有罪的。

We know that the Minutemen’s statement was sent by the Provincial Congress to Parliament and the British people, hoping to portray themselves as innocent victims of British aggression, not rabblerousing revolutionaries. For his part, Barker likely didn’t keep a diary simply to record his innermost feelings, but because it might serve to exonerate him if he had to justify his actions to higher authorities. Indeed, in a study we did using these documents with a group of historians and a group of high school students, one of the historians suggested to us that Barker may have been trying to “cover his backside.” Caught between two unflattering alternatives—admitting that he issued an order to fire or admitting that he lost control over his troops—the latter option was preferable.10 Thus, Barker’s diary would provide an alibi if the lieutenant had to defend himself against a charge of issuing an order to shoot. If he was at fault, it wasn’t because he issued an order to fire, but because his men, tired and soggy after a 3-hour march, were guilty of firing back when fired upon.

学生面临的挑战。当历史学家审查有关列克星敦或任何历史事件的证据时,他们首先使用一套通用的问题解决策略。首先,他们询问来源我们将这个过程称为“采购”。约翰·巴克中尉是谁?我们如何知道他的可信度?我们对证人纳撒尼尔·马利肯、菲利普·拉塞尔以及他们召集起来在三名大法官面前作证的团体了解多少?和平?接下来,历史学家考虑文件的背景:例如,为什么民兵要寻求治安法官来就列克星敦发生的事情进行证词?知道他们的证词将被发送给殖民地议会代表本杰明·富兰克林(Benjamin Franklin),这对他们对法官的所作所为有何影响?最后,即使这些文件在关键细节上存在分歧,检查多个文件(佐证行为)如何才能更广泛地理解这些事件?

Challenges for Students. When historians review evidence about Lexington or any historical event, they begin by using a common set of problem solving strategies. First, they ask about the source, a process we refer to as “sourcing.” Who was Lt. John Barker and how do we know he can be believed? What do we know about the deponents Nathaniel Mulliken, Philip Russell, and the group they assembled to testify before three Justices of the Peace? Next, historians consider a document’s context: Why, for example, did the Minutemen seek justices of the peace to take depositions for what happened at Lexington? How did knowing that their testimony would be sent to Benjamin Franklin, the colonial representative to Parliament, influence what they did and did not say to the justices? Finally, how does examining multiple documents, the act of corroboration, permit a broader understanding of these events, even when these documents disagree on key details?

在我们上面提到的研究中,我们使用这些列克星敦文件将一组专业历史学家与一组才华横溢的高中生进行了比较。我们特意挑选了美国历史以外专业的历史学家,并特意挑选了参加大学先修课程的学生,他们在有关美国革命的事实测试中取得了良好的成绩。鉴于此处使用的相同来源和教科书段落,每个小组根据每个文档的可靠性对每个文档进行排名。对于历史学家来说,教科书上的这段话排在最后,因为它的说法无法得到证实。11另一方面,学生倾向于认为教科书可靠,在一个案例中观察到这本书“只是报告事实”。12对于学生来说,缺乏确凿证据和每份文献的来源信息似乎并不重要,但这些因素对历史学家来说却至关重要。尽管高中生的阅读能力很强,但他们还没有养成进行历史探究所需的习惯。

In the study we referred to above, we compared a group of professional historians to a group of talented high school students using these Lexington documents. We purposely selected historians with specialties outside of American history, and we purposely selected students enrolled in Advanced Placement classrooms who had scored well on a test of facts about the American Revolution. Given the same sources and textbook passage used here, each group ranked each document in terms of its reliability. For historians, the textbook passage ranked dead last, because its claims could not be verified.11 Students, on the other hand, tended to view the textbook as most reliable, observing in one case that the book was “just reporting the facts.”12 Neither the lack of corroborating evidence nor the source information for each document seemed of great importance to the students, but those factors were of utmost importance to the historians. Even though the high school students were skilled readers, they had not yet acquired the habits necessary for engaging in historical inquiry.

1775 年 4 月 19 日上午在列克星敦格林发生的事情这一问题,为学生提供了一个成熟的机会,让他们开始培养历史阅读技能和思维习惯。美国人集体记忆的一部分是民兵在列克星敦坚强站立的形象,用拉尔夫·沃尔多·爱默生的话说,他们开枪时“全世界都听到了枪声”。但对列克星敦证据的审查对这一英雄的描述提出了令人不安的问题。图像和证据之间的差异为学生提供了研究历史的切入点:调查和评估证据,将个人叙述置于更大的背景中,并证实文件,所有这些都是为了构建过去发生的事情的图景。这里学生的任务看似简单:

The question of what happened on Lexington Green on the morning of April 19, 1775, provides a ripe opportunity for students to begin to develop historical reading skills and habits of mind. Part of Americans’ collective memory is the image of the Minutemen standing strong at Lexington as they fired, in Ralph Waldo Emerson’s words, the “shot heard ’round the world.” But an examination of the evidence from Lexington raises troubling questions about this heroic depiction. The discrepancies between image and evidence provide students with an entry point into doing history: investigating and evaluating evidence, placing individual accounts into a larger context, and corroborating documents, all with the purpose of constructing a picture of what happened in the past. Here the task for students is deceptively straightforward: to determine whether the Battle of Lexington was, in fact, even a battle!

结论性问题。因此,让我们退后一步,考虑一下我们对列克星敦格林事件的了解,我们永远无法了解的内容,以及仍然可以争取的内容。我们知道,当英国军队在前往康科德的途中抵达列克星敦时,绿地遭到枪击,导致八名民兵死亡、十人受伤,而英国人方面的伤亡极小(可能是友军交火造成的)。我们不知道是谁开了第一枪,而且可能永远不会知道。在这一点上,不同的消息来源相互矛盾,并且每个消息来源都有强烈的动机来声称它确实如此。

Concluding Questions. So let’s step back and consider what we know about the events on Lexington Green, what we will never be able to know, and what is still up for grabs. We know that when the British troops arrived in Lexington en route to Concord shots were fired on the Green that left eight Minutemen dead and ten wounded, and that the British for their part sustained minimal casualties (possibly caused by friendly fire). We do not know who fired the first shot and probably never will. Different sources contradict one another on this point, and each has a strong motive for making the claim that it does.

在这些说法之间,学生们在努力构建准确的历史叙述时可以辩论一些问题:列克星敦之战真的是一场战斗吗?那天早上民兵们打算抵抗英国人吗?如果不是,他们的目标是什么?英国人的意图是什么?在随后的美国独立斗争中,这些事件对美国人和英国意味着什么?

In between these claims are questions that students can debate as they work to construct an accurate historical narrative: Was the battle at Lexington really a battle? Did the Minutemen intend to resist the British that morning? If not, what was their goal? What was the intention of the British? What did these events mean for both the Americans and the British in the context of the ensuing struggle for American independence?

为什么要讲授列克星敦格林战役?

Why Teach About the Battle at Lexington Green?

教授已知知识的机会。历史上的一些事件是众所周知的,并且对于发生的事情几乎没有争议。对于这个话题,毫无疑问,1775 年 4 月 19 日,列克星敦格林发生了一场冲突。然而,其他方面却超出了我们的直接理解。无论我们做什么,我们永远无法绝对确定发生了什么。

An Opportunity to Teach About What Is Knowable. Some events in history are well-established and there is little debate about what happened. For this topic, there is no question that a conflict took place on Lexington Green on April 19, 1775. Yet other aspects lie beyond our immediate understanding. No matter how much we do, we will never know with absolute certainty what happened.

历史学家正是在这个既定事实与未知之间的空间中辛勤劳作。努力理解什么是可以知道的,什么是不可以知道的,迫使学生们与混乱的证据作斗争,并给他们一个从事合法历史工作的机会。

It is in this space—between the well-established and the unknowable—that historians toil. Struggling to understand what can and can’t be known forces students to wrestle with the messiness of evidence, and gives them a chance to engage in legitimate historical work.

探索神话如何与历史交织在一起的机会。每个国家的历史都充满传奇、曲解和神话。教导学生事实不准确如何渗透到历史记录中,甚至被铭刻在邮票上,对于帮助他们培养怀疑精神和对证据的敏锐眼光至关重要。同样重要的是,这种方法将学生变成了寻找真相的历史侦探,这项任务比填写工作表更具激励性。

A Chance to Explore How Myth Becomes Interwoven with History. Every nation’s history is full of legends, distortions, and myths. Teaching students how factual inaccuracies creep into the historical record, even becoming enshrined on a postage stamp, is essential to helping them develop a sense of skepticism and a keen eye for evidence. Equally important, this approach turns students into historical detectives in search of truth, a task far more motivating than filling in a worksheet.

未经英国和美国主要消息来源证实,民兵在列克星敦“高高矗立”的形象是由个人兴趣、可疑的学术和当地的担忧塑造的。因此,它提供了一个机会,让学生思考作者的动机、证据的重要性,以及重写过去以适应当前需要的始终存在的趋势。

Corroborated neither by British nor American primary sources, the image of Minutemen “standing tall” at Lexington has been shaped by personal interest, dubious scholarship, and local concerns. Consequently, it presents an opportunity to teach students to think about the motives of authors, the importance of evidence, and the ever-present tendency to rewrite the past to suit the needs of the present.

使用视觉资源的机会。主要来源是历史的原材料。历史学家常常依靠书面文件来拼凑过去的事件。但视觉来源也可以是主要来源。阿莫斯·杜利特尔 (Amos Doolittle) 于 1775 年雕刻的一切都与埃兹拉·斯蒂尔斯的日记一样是主要来源。两者都是与赛事本身同一年创作的,并且都试图为了子孙后代记录列克星敦格林的赛事。

An Opportunity to Use Visual Sources. Primary sources are the raw materials of history. More often than not, historians rely on written documents to piece together the events of the past. But visual sources can be primary sources, too. Amos Doolittle’s 1775 engraving is every bit as much a primary source as the diary of Ezra Stiles. Both were created in the same year as the event itself, and both attempted to record the events at Lexington Green for the sake of posterity.

使用视觉资源对于历史探究的过程是无价的。即使学生在书面资料上苦苦挣扎,也能有效地找到阿莫斯·杜立特的版画和亨利·桑德姆的油画之间的视觉差异,并就为什么这两个图像可能不一致提出假设。但要注意:当你使用视觉资源时,学生总是会误以为视觉准确性(图片看起来有多真实)与历史准确性。因为桑德姆的画作“看起来更真实”,比杜立特的简笔画有更逼真的描绘,一些学生会认为它是两者中更准确的,即使面对压倒性的相反证据。

Using visual sources is invaluable to the process of history inquiry. Even students struggling with written sources can productively locate the visual discrepancies between Amos Doolittle’s engraving and Henry Sandham’s oil painting, and generate hypotheses for why the two images might disagree. But beware: When you use visual sources, students will invariably mistake visual accuracy—how realistic a picture looks—with historical accuracy. Because Sandham’s painting “looks more real,” with more lifelike depictions than Doolittle’s stick figures, some students will judge it to be the more accurate of the two, even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

您将如何使用这些材料?

How Might You Use These Materials?

场景 1(1-2 小时课程)。列克星敦格林之战真的是一场战斗吗?分析并比较列克星敦格林冲突的图像,找出可能发生的情况(参见工具 2.1)。

Scenario 1 (1–2 Hour Lesson). Was the battle at Lexington Green truly a battle? Analyze and compare images of the conflict at Lexington Green to figure out what might have happened (see Tool 2.1).


CCSS

9–10 #1

11–12 #4

CCSS

9–10 #1

11–12 #4


从三幅图像开始本课程:Doolittle 雕刻、Sandham 绘画和美国邮票图像(来源2.1、2.2、2.3 )。不依赖每张图像的日期,让学生描述他们所看到的内容。他们会注意到邮票是根据桑德姆的画作制作的,在学生心目中这可能会赋予该图像特殊的合法性。(否则为什么邮政服务会选择展示它?)帮助学生确定这两个图像提供了同一事件的不同版本。由于桑德姆的绘画得益于在描绘透视和深度方面的艺术进步,一些学生会认为它是两者中更准确的一个。发展历史判断力的一部分是抵制那些吸引眼球的东西,并认识到生动性和艺术现实主义不能替代真实性。

Begin this lesson with three images: the Doolittle engraving, the Sandham painting, and the image of the U.S. postage stamp (Sources 2.1, 2.2, 2.3). Without recourse to the dates of each image, ask students to describe what they see. They will notice that the postage stamp is based on the Sandham painting, which in students’ minds may confer the image with special legitimacy. (Why else would the postal service choose to feature it?) Help students establish that these two images provide different versions of the same event. Because Sandham’s painting benefits from artistic advances in portraying perspective and depth, some students will judge it to be the more accurate of the two. Part of developing historical judgment is resisting what appeals to the eye, and learning that vividness and artistic realism are no substitute for truthfulness.

让学生解释他们所看到的。他们是否发现列克星敦格林上的战斗人员之间在外表、姿势或组织上的差异?学生会注意到一些一致性——一棵树、建筑物、排成一排的军队——以及一些矛盾,例如民兵是逃跑还是坚守阵地。虽然有些学生会尝试创作协调图像的故事,但其他学生会认为一个图像是准确的,而另一个图像则不准确。

Ask students to interpret what they see. Do they detect differences in appearance, posture, or organization between the combatants on Lexington Green? Students will notice some consistencies—a tree, buildings, troops arrayed in a line—as well as some contradictions, such as whether the Minutemen fled or held their ground. While some students will try to create stories that reconcile the images, others will assume that one image is accurate and the other not.

此时,在讨论中引入杜立特版画和桑德姆绘画的日期,提醒学生这些事件发生在 1775 年。帮助他们挖掘这一新信息的重要性。我们离实际事件越远,人类的记忆会发生什么变化?将学生分成小组,检查两份书面主要来源文件(来源 2.4、2.5),目的是确认或重新评估他们在指导性问题上的立场

At this point, introduce into the discussion the dates of the Doolittle engraving and the Sandham painting, reminding students that the events took place in 1775. Help them to mine the importance of this new information. What happens to human memory the more distant we become from actual events? Organize students into groups to examine the two written primary source documents (Sources 2.4, 2.5) with the aim of confirming or reevaluating their positions on the guiding question.

为了评估学生对视觉文件的阅读能力,请他们考虑美国革命前的另一事件波士顿大屠杀的图像。使用优秀的“数字历史”网站上的 Stephen Mintz 的“探索 2”(参见http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/learning_history/revolution/revolution_art.cfm),考虑 Paul Revere 著名的 1770 年版画以及 1770 年的石版画,另一幅 1868 年的作品。哪一幅最准确地描述了波士顿大屠杀?视觉准确性和历史准确性有何不同?

To assess students’ reading of visual documents, ask them to consider images from another event in pre-Revolutionary America, the Boston Massacre. Using Stephen Mintz’s “Exploration 2” on the excellent “Digital History” website (see http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/learning_history/revolution/revolution_art.cfm), consider Paul Revere’s famous 1770 engraving alongside a lithograph from 1770 and another from 1868. Which depicts the Boston Massacre most accurately? How do visual accuracy and historical accuracy differ?

图像


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 分析图像
  • Analyzing images
  • 区分视觉准确性和历史准确性
  • Distinguishing between visual and historical accuracy
  • 情境化来源
  • Contextualizing sources
  • 证实消息来源
  • Corroborating sources
  • 基于证据的思考和论证
  • Evidence-based thinking and argumentation

场景 2(1 小时课程)。专注于采购。此场景教会学生优先考虑通常出现在文档末尾的信息,即有关文档编写者及其构成情况的信息。新手通常会跳过此信息或很少注意。另一方面,历史学家会立即放大它,经常将其用作随后分析的框架。

Scenario 2 (1 Hour Lesson). Focus on sourcing. This scenario teaches students to privilege the information that typically appears at the end of a document—information about who wrote a document and the circumstances of its composition. Novices typically skip this information or give it little heed. Historians, on the other hand, zoom in on it immediately, often using it as a framework for their ensuing analysis.


CCSS

#1、#6

CCSS

#1, #6


从课本帐户开始(来源2.7)。这段摘录为您提供了一个绝佳的机会来教您的学生如何仔细阅读并关注词语如何传达感觉和情感。让他们在这短短的一段中追踪民兵是如何经历蜕变的,从“四面楚歌的农民”(暗指爱默生的“协和赞美诗”)到“反叛者”(教科书作者为什么要把这个词放在引号中,他们做了什么意味着什么?),只是为了成为“整个新英格兰的爱国者”。请他们思考这本教科书的标题。这里呈现的叙述类型和书名之间有什么关系?诸如此类的问题可以让学生更加敏感地阅读课本,而不仅仅是为了获取课本所提供的信息。它帮助他们将教科书理解为另一种历史来源,

Begin with the textbook account (Source 2.7). This excerpt provides you with an excellent opportunity to teach your students how to read closely and to focus on how words convey feeling and emotion. Ask them to track how the Minutemen undergo a metamorphosis in this short paragraph, moving from “embattled farmers” (an allusion to Emerson’s “Concord Hymn”) to “rebels” (Why would the textbook author put this word in quotes and what do they signify?), only to emerge as “patriots of all New England.” Ask them to think about the title of this textbook. What is the relationship between the kind of narrative presented here and the book’s title? Questions like these sensitize students to reading their textbooks for more than the information they present. It helps them understand their textbook as another kind of historical source, one that also carries a perspective and reflects a particular point of view.

向学生介绍来源 2.42.5(根据他们的阅读水平,您可以选择使用改编或原始文件)。通过解释历史学家甚至在研究文档的实质内容之前,就询问有关文档的作者、其创建的环境以及文档的创建与其所描述的事件之间的关系的问题,来提供有关来源的明确说明。典型的问题包括:谁编写(或创建)了这份文档?作者的观点是什么?作者为什么要写这个?这个作者值得信赖吗(例如,作者通过写这篇文章会得到什么或失去什么)?请参阅工具 2.2,其中包含针对本课程中特定文档定制的问题。

Introduce students to Sources 2.4 and 2.5 (depending on their reading level, you can choose to use the adapted or the original documents). Provide explicit instruction about sourcing by explaining that historians, even before they study the substance of a document, ask questions about a document’s author, the circumstances of its creation, and the relationship between a document’s creation and the event it describes. Typical questions include: Who wrote (or created) this document? What is the author’s perspective? Why did the author write this? Is this author trustworthy (e.g., what does the author stand to gain or lose by writing this)? See Tool 2.2 with questions tailored to the particular documents in this lesson.

学生完成此工具后,返回教科书摘录并评估其关于民兵“坚守阵地”的说法。与相反双方撰写的两份文件相比,这一主张如何站得住脚?要了解学生对消息来源的推理如何发展,请他们解释在评估民兵“坚持自己的立场”的主张时哪些消息来源最可信和最不可信。这将帮助您评估学生是否能够获取、关联和证实主要文件。

After students have completed this Tool, return to the textbook excerpt and evaluate its claim that the Minutemen “stood their ground.” How does this claim hold up compared to what two documents, written from opposing sides, say? To see how students’ reasoning about sources develops, ask them to explain which sources are the most and least trustworthy in evaluating the claim that the Minutemen “stood their ground.” This will help you assess whether students can source, contextualize, and corroborate primary documents.

图像

或者,给学生提供两个他们没有见过的来源:Ezra Stiles 文档(来源 2.6)和 Jeremy Lister 的摘录(来源 2.8)。让他们比较这两份文件,重点关注来源信息如何体现可信度概念。Stiles到底是如何得到他的信息的?这些信息到底经过了多少人的手才传到他手上?我们能确定吗?事件列表器记录与实际事件发生之间相隔多长时间?在这些事件发生很久之后,李斯特记录这些事件的动机可能是什么?

Alternately, give students two sources they have not seen: the Ezra Stiles document (Source 2.6) and the excerpt from Jeremy Lister (Source 2.8). Have them compare the two documents, focusing on how sourcing information informs notions of trustworthiness. How, exactly, did Stiles get his information? How many hands did this information pass through before it reached him? Can we know for sure? How much time has passed between the event Lister records and when the actual events happened? What might be Lister’s motivation for recording these events so long after they occurred?


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 采购文件
  • Sourcing documents
  • 了解采购及其必要性
  • Understanding sourcing and why it is necessary
  • 确定来源的可靠性
  • Determining reliability of sources
  • 质疑叙述性叙述
  • Questioning narrative accounts
  • 基于证据的思考和论证
  • Evidence-based thinking and argumentation

场景 3(2-3 小时课程)。神话如何成为历史?在本课中,引导学生完成场景 1 中描述的分析和讨论,并重点关注场景 2 中描述的采购。然而,这不是要求学生制作一个最终项目,在其中详细说明使来源可信的要素,该场景以一个项目达到高潮,在该项目中,学生探索使神话渗入历史记录的各种力量。

Scenario 3 (2–3 Hour Lesson). How does myth become history? For this lesson, lead students through the analysis and discussion rounds described in Scenario 1, and the focus on sourcing described in Scenario 2. However, rather than asking students to produce a final project in which they detail elements that make a source credible, this scenario culminates in a project in which students explore the various forces that allow myth to creep into the historical record.


CCSS

#8、#9

CCSS

#8, #9


在学生讨论他们发现最多最少的来源之后可靠,请他们指出可靠和不可靠来源的质量。不可靠消息来源的动机是什么?这些消息来源从他们的不准确中得到什么好处?这些不准确的内容吸引了哪些受众?有关列克星敦事件的某些故事是如何流传下来的?哪些版本可能被录制,哪些版本不太可能被录制?提醒他们最初的指导性问题(“列克星敦格林的战斗真的是一场战斗吗?”)以及邮票中描绘的概念,即民兵顽强地对抗英国军队。现在,要求他们完成一个最终项目,例如一篇短文或口头演示,详细说明有助于将神话变成历史的元素和力量。

After students discuss which sources they found most and least reliable, ask them to pinpoint the qualities of reliable and unreliable sources. What were the motives of the unreliable sources? What did these sources stand to gain from their inaccuracies? To which audience did such inaccuracies appeal? How did certain stories about the events at Lexington get passed down? Which versions were likely to be recorded, and which were unlikely? Remind them of the original guiding question (“Was the battle at Lexington Green really a battle?”) and of the notion portrayed in the postage stamp that the Minutemen stood tall against British troops. Now, ask them to complete a final project such as a short essay or oral presentation that details the elements and forces that help turn myth into history.


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 确定来源的可靠性
  • Determining reliability of sources
  • 神话与历史的区别
  • Distinguishing between myth and history

来源和工具

Sources and Tools

来源2.1 D OOLITTLE绘画

SOURCE 2.1: DOOLITTLE PAINTING


图像


资料来源:列克星敦之战,1775 年 4 月 19 日,作者:Amos Doolittle,1775 年,公共领域图片,http: //images.nypl.org/ ?id=54426&t=w

Source: The Battle of Lexington, April 19th, 1775, by Amos Doolittle, 1775, public domain image, http://images.nypl.org/?id=54426&t=w

 

 

资料来源2.2 桑德姆绘画

SOURCE 2.2: SANDHAM PAINTING


图像


资料来源:《自由的诞生》,作者:Henry Sandham,1886 年,http://www.mce.k12tn.net/revolutionary_war/lexington.gif

Source: Birth of Liberty by Henry Sandham, 1886, http://www.mce.k12tn.net/revolutionary_war/lexington.gif

 

 

资料来源2.3 美国邮票

SOURCE 2.3: U.S. POSTAGE STAMP


图像


来源:美国邮票,1925 年,http://hubpages.com/hub/US-Postage-Stamps-1925

Source: U.S. Postage Stamp, 1925, http://hubpages.com/hub/US-Postage-Stamps-1925

 

 

资料来源2.4:巴克日记改编版)

SOURCE 2.4: BARKER DIARY (ADAPTED)


19日。凌晨两点,我们涉水穿过一条没过我们中间的河流,开始了我们的行军。走了几英里后,我们来到了一个叫列克星敦的小镇。我们听说有数百人聚集在那里计划反对我们。5 点钟我们到达,看到 200 到 300 人之间的人聚集在镇中心的一块田地(列克星敦绿地)。

19th. At 2 o’clock in the morning we began our march by wading through a river that came up to our middles; after going a few miles we came to a town called Lexington. We heard there were hundreds of people gathered there who planned to oppose us. At 5 o’clock we arrived and saw a number of people, between 200 and 300, formed in a field (Lexington Green) in the middle of the town.

我们继续行军,虽然无意攻击他们,但仍做好了应对攻击的准备。当我们靠近时,他们开了一两枪。一旦发生这种情况,我们的人就没有任何命令,冲向他们,开枪将他们打跑。

We continued marching, keeping prepared against an attack though without intending to attack them. On our coming near, they fired one or two shots. As soon as that happened, our men without any orders, rushed in upon them, fired and put them to flight.

我们重新集结,但遇到了一些困难,因为我们的人太狂野了,他们听不到任何命令。

We regrouped, but with some difficulty because our men were so wild they could hear no orders.


资料来源:1775 年 4 月 19 日的条目,来自英国陆军军官约翰·巴克中尉的日记;RH Dana, Jr.,驻波士顿的英国军官。《大西洋月刊》,39,1877年,389–401。

Source: Entry for April 19, 1775, from the diary of Lieutenant John Barker, an officer in the British army; R. H. Dana, Jr., A British Officer in Boston. The Atlantic Monthly, 39, 1877, 389–401.

(原来的)

(Original)

19日。两点钟,我们开始行军,涉水穿过一条很长的浅滩,一直到我们的中间。走了几英里后,我们带了三四个人去提供情报。在我们路上的一个叫列克星敦的小镇这边大约五英里处,我们听说有大约数百人聚集在一起,打算反对我们并阻止我们继续前进。5点钟我们到达那里,看到有很多人,我相信有2到300人,聚集在镇中心的一个公共场所;我们仍然继续前进,做好了进攻的准备,但并没有打算攻击他们。但当我们接近他们时,他们开了一两枪,我们的人在没有任何命令的情况下冲向他们,开枪把他们打跑。其中有几个人被杀了,我们不知道有多少人,因为他们被困在墙后和树林里;我们有一名第十轻步兵团的士兵受伤,没有其他人受伤。然后我们在公共地列队,但遇到了一些困难,这些人太狂野了,他们听不到任何命令。我们在那里等了相当长的时间,最后继续前往康科德。

19th. At 2 o’clock we began our march by wading through a very long ford up to our middles; after going a few miles we took three or four people who were going off to give intelligence; about five miles on this side of a town called Lexington, which lay in our road, we heard there were some hundreds of people collected together intending to oppose us and stop our going on; at 5 o’clock we arrived there and saw a number of people, I believe between 2 and 300, formed on a common in the middle of the town; we still continued advancing, keeping prepared against an attack th’o without intending to attack them; but on our coming near them they fired one or two shots, upon which our men without any orders, rushed in upon them, fired and put them to flight; several of them were killed, we cou’d not tell how many, because they were got behind walls and into the woods; We had a man of the 10th light Infantry wounded, nobody else hurt. We then formed on the Common but with some difficulty, the men were so wild they cou’d hear no orders; we waited a considerable time there, and at length proceeded on our way to Concord.

 

 

资料来源2.5:民兵证词(经过修改

SOURCE 2.5: MINUTEMEN’S DEPOSITIONS (ADAPTED)


我们纳撒尼尔·马利肯、菲利普·拉塞尔(后面是 1775 年 4 月 19 日在列克星敦格林出现的其他 32 名男子的名字)所有合法年龄的列克星敦居民作证并声明,在 4 月 19 日,大约 1 点或 2 点上午,我们得知英国士兵正从波士顿向康科德进军。

We Nathaniel Mulliken, Philip Russell (followed by the names of 32 other men present on Lexington Green on April 19, 1775) All of lawful age, and inhabitants of Lexington, do testify and declare, that on April 19th, at about 1 or 2 am, we were told that British soldiers were marching from Boston towards Concord.

我们被命令在镇中心[列克星敦格林]的场地集合,队长告诉我们回家,但要准备好在听到鼓声时回来。我们进一步作证并声明,凌晨5点左右,我们听到鼓声就回来了,很快就发现一大群军队正在向我们走来。

We were ordered to meet at the field at the center of town [Lexington Green], where we were told by our captain to go back home, but to be ready to come back when we heard the beat of the drum. We further testify and declare that about 5 o’clock in the morning, hearing our drumbeat, we returned, and soon found a large body of troops marching towards us.

那时,我们小组中的一些人正在前往列克星敦格林,其他人已经到达那里。我们的人开始散去。当我们背对[英国]军队时,我们遭到他们的射击,我们的一些人被杀或受伤。据我们所知,在英国士兵向我们开枪之前,我们小组中的任何人都没有向他们开枪。英国人继续开火,直到我们全部逃脱。

At that point, some of our group was making its way toward Lexington Green, and others had reached it. Our men began to disperse [leave]. While our backs were turned on the [British] troops, we were fired on by them, and a number of our men were killed and wounded. To our knowledge, not a gun was fired by any person in our group on the British soldiers before they fired on us. The British continued firing until we had all made our escape.


资料来源:列克星敦,1775 年 4 月 25 日,Nathaniel Mulliken、Philip Russell,[和 32 名男子][4 月 25 日在三名太平绅士面前由 34 名民兵正式宣誓就职];CC·索特尔。1775 年四月十九日:第一手资料集(马萨诸塞州林肯:萨默塞特的索特尔,1968 年)。

Source: Lexington, April 25, 1775, Nathaniel Mulliken, Philip Russell, [and the 32 men] [Duly sworn to by 34 minutemen on April 25 before three justices of the peace]; C. C. Sawtell. The Nineteeth of April, 1775: A Collection of First Hand Accounts (Lincoln, MA: Sawtells of Somerset, 1968).

(原来的)

(Original)

我们纳撒尼尔·马利肯、菲利普·拉塞尔(后面是 1775 年 4 月 19 日列克星敦格林出现的其他 32 名男子的名字)……所有达到法定年龄的米德尔塞克斯郡列克星敦居民……作证并声明,四月十九号的那一刻,大约凌晨一两点,我们得知……一队常客正从波士顿向康科德进发……我们很震惊,在我们连队的游行地点相遇,被我们的部队解散了。约翰·帕克上尉,目前接到命令,准备在鼓声响起时参加,我们进一步作证并声明,早上五点左右,听到我们的鼓声,我们向游行出发,很快发现一大群部队正在向我们行进,我们连的一些人正在向游行队伍走来,还有一些人已经到达了,这时,连队开始散去,而我们背对着部队,遭到他们的射击,我们的一些人立即死伤,但我们连里没有人开枪。据我们所知,他们在向我们开火之前就已经是常客了,他们继续开火,直到我们全部逃跑。

We Nathaniel Mulliken, Philip Russell, (Followed by the names of 32 other men present on Lexington Green on April 19, 1775) … all of lawful age, and inhabitants of Lexington, in the County of Middlesex … do testify and declare, that on the nineteenth of April instant, about one or two o’clock in the morning, being informed that … a body of regulars were marching from Boston towards Concord … we were alarmed and having met at the place of our company’s parade, were dismissed by our Captain, John Parker, for the present with orders to be ready to attend at the beat of the drum, we further testify and declare, that about five o’clock in the morning, hearing our drum beat, we proceeded towards the parade and soon found that a large body of troops were marching towards us, some of our company were coming up to the parade, and others had reached it, at which time, the company began to disperse, whilst our backs were turned on the troops, we were fired on by them, and a number of our men were instantly killed and wounded, not a gun was fired by any person in our company on the regulars to our knowledge before they fired on us, and they continued firing until we had all made our escape.

 

 

资料来源2.6:STILES信件(修改

SOURCE 2.6: STILES LETTER (ADAPTED)


关于射击开始的描述相对不清楚。皮特凯恩少校是一位为邪恶事业而战的好人,他直到去世那天都坚持认为殖民者首先开枪…… 他并没有说他首先看到殖民者开火。如果他这么说,我会相信他,因为他是一个正直和荣誉的人。他明确表示他没有看到谁先开枪;但他相信是美国农民开始了枪击事件。

Descriptions of the beginning of the firing are relatively unclear. Major Pitcairn, who was a good man fighting for a bad cause, insisted to the day he died that the colonists fired first…. He does not say that he saw the colonists fire first. Had he said it, I would have believed him, because he is a man of integrity and honor. He expressly says he did not see who fired first; but he believed the American peasants began the shooting.

他的说法是,他骑马走到农民面前,命令他们散开。由于他们没有立即采取行动,他命令他的部队分散开来,包围殖民者并解除他们的武装。当他转身时,他看到墙后一个农民手中握着一把枪。枪未发射子弹就失火了;立即有两三门枪响,皮特凯恩少校的马和他附近的一个人受伤。他没有看到那些枪,但他相信它们不可能来自英国军队,一定是美国殖民者发动了袭击。

His account is that he rode up to the peasants and ordered them to disperse. Because they did not do so instantly, he ordered his troops to spread out and surround the colonists and disarm them. As he turned, he saw a gun in a peasant’s hand from behind a wall. The gun misfired without firing a bullet; and instantly two or three guns went off, wounding Major Pitcairn’s horse and also a man near him. He did not see those guns, but he believed they could not have been from British troops and that it must have been the American colonists who began the attack.

英国军队是如此急切和冲动,以至于他们在没有命令的情况下开始射击,皮特凯恩少校无法阻止他们射击。皮特凯恩严肃地向下挥动他的手杖或剑,向他的部下发出停止射击的信号。

The British troops were so eager and impulsive that they began shooting without orders and Major Pitcairn could not keep them from shooting. Pitcairn struck his staff or sword downwards with all seriousness as a signal to his men to stop firing.

皮特凯恩少校把这个故事告诉了普罗维登斯的布朗先生,他在战斗几天后前往波士顿,告诉了塞申斯州长,塞申斯州长又把这个故事告诉了我。

Major Pitcairn told this story to Mr. Brown of Providence who went to Boston a few days after the battle and told Governor Sessions, who then told it to me.


资料来源:摘自耶鲁大学校长埃兹拉·斯蒂尔斯 (Ezra Stiles) 的日记,记录于 1775 年 8 月 21 日;见 FB Dexter 主编,《以斯拉·斯蒂尔斯的文学日记》(纽约:查尔斯·斯克里布纳,1901 年)。

Source: From the diary of Ezra Stiles, president of Yale College, entry for August 21, 1775; In F. B. Dexter, ed., The Literary Diary of Ezra Stiles (New York: Charles Scribner, 1901).

(原来的)

(Original)

在描述射击的开始时存在一定的滑动和不确定性。皮特凯恩少校是一个好人,但他一直坚持到他去世的那天,殖民者首先开火……。他并没有说他首先看到殖民者开火。如果他这么说,我会相信他,因为他是一个正直和荣誉的人。他明确表示他没有看到谁先开枪;但相信农民开始了。他的叙述是这样的——他骑马冲向他们,命令他们散开;他们没有立即行动,他转身命令他的部队撤出,包围他们并解除他们的武装。当他转身时,他看到墙后一个农民手里拿着一把枪,昙花一现,没有走火。; 立刻或很快,两三枪响了,他发现他的马受伤了,他附近的一个人也受伤了。他没有看到这些枪,但相信它们不可能来自他自己的人民,因此毫不怀疑,因此断言它们来自我们的人民;他们就这样开始了进攻。国王军队的冲动使得一场混乱的、不受指挥的但普遍的火灾发生,皮特凯恩无法阻止。尽管他认真地向下击打他的手杖或剑,作为克制或停止射击的信号。皮特凯恩少校亲自向普罗维登斯的布朗先生讲述了这一情况,布朗先生在战斗后几天被抓获面粉并运往波士顿。塞申斯州长告诉我的。

There is a certain sliding over and indeterminateness in describing the beginning of the firing. Major Pitcairn, who was a good man in a bad cause, insisted upon it to the day of his death, that the colonists fired first…. He does not say that he saw the colonists fire first. Had he said it, I would have believed him, being a man of integrity and honor. He expressly says he did not see who fired first; and yet believed the peasants began. His account is this—that riding up to them he ordered them to disperse; which they not doing instantly, he turned about to order his troops so to draw out as to surround and disarm them. As he turned, he saw a gun in a peasant’s hand from behind a wall, flash in the pan without going off; and instantly or very soon two or three guns went off by which he found his horse wounded and also a man near him wounded. These guns he did not see, but believing they could not come from his own people, doubted not and so asserted that they came from our people; and that thus they began the attack. The impetuosity of the King’s Troops were such that a promiscuous, uncommanded but general fire took place, which Pitcairn could not prevent; though he struck his staff or sword downwards with all earnestness as a signal to forbear or cease firing. This account Major Pitcairn himself gave Mr. Brown of Providence who was seized with flour and carried to Boston a few days after the battle; and Gov. Sessions told it to me.

 

 

资料来源2.7:《列克星教科书版本

SOURCE 2.7: TEXTBOOK VERSION OF LEXINGTON


1775 年 4 月,马萨诸塞州军事总督盖奇将军派出一支部队,占领了距离波士顿不远的康科德的军用物资。在列克星敦,保罗·里维尔通风报信后,少数“陷入困境的农民”挡住了道路。“叛乱分子”被命令驱散。他们坚持自己的立场。英国人齐射,打死八名爱国者。不久之后,疾驰的保罗·里维尔将这一新暴行的消息传播到了邻近的殖民地。全新英格兰的爱国者,虽然还只是少数,但现在已经准备好与英国人作战了。

In April 1775, General Gage, the military governor of Massachusetts, sent out a body of troops to take possession of military stores at Concord, a short distance from Boston. At Lexington, a handful of “embattled farmers,” who had been tipped off by Paul Revere, barred the way. The “rebels” were ordered to disperse. They stood their ground. The English fired a volley of shots that killed eight patriots. It was not long before the swift-riding Paul Revere spread the news of this new atrocity to the neighboring colonies. The patriots of all of New England, although still a handful, were now ready to fight the English.


资料来源:来自高中教科书:Samuel Steinberg,《美国:自由人民的故事》(波士顿:Allyn 和 Bacon,1963 年)。

Source: From a high school textbook: Samuel Steinberg, The United States: Story of a Free People (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1963).

 

 

资料来源2.8:列表者的帐户

SOURCE 2.8: LISTER’S ACCOUNT


据我所知,4 月 19 日凌晨 4 点左右,5 个幌子公司被命令装载,我们照做了……。正是在列克星敦,我们看到他们的一个连队按常规排列。海军陆战队第二指挥皮特凯恩少校要求他们散开,但他们似乎不愿意,他希望我们注意我们的空间,当他们向我们开火然后跑到墙后时,我们就这样做了。我们连的一名士兵腿部受伤,他的名字叫约翰逊,皮特凯恩少校的马侧翼也中弹;我们回敬了他们的敬礼,在我们从列克星敦出发之前,我相信我们杀伤了七八个人。

To the best of my recollection about 4 o’clock in the morning being the 19th of April the 5 front companies was ordered to load which we did…. It was at Lexington when we saw one of their companies drawn up in regular order. Major Pitcairn of the Marines second in command called to them to disperse, but their not seeming willing he desired us to mind our space which we did when they gave us a fire then run off to get behind a wall. We had one man wounded of our Company in the leg, his name was Johnson, also Major Pitcairn’s horse was shot in the flank; we returned their salute, and before we proceeded on our march from Lexington I believe we killed and wounded either 7 or 8 men.


资料来源:少尉杰里米·利斯特 (Jeremy Lister),列克星敦最年轻的英国军官,写于 1782 年的个人叙述。重印于 J.利斯特 (J. Lister),《协和之战》 (Concord Fight )(马萨诸塞州剑桥:哈佛大学出版社,1931 年)。

Source: Ensign Jeremy Lister, youngest of the British officers at Lexington, in a personal narrative written in 1782. Reprinted in J. Lister, Concord Fight (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1931).

 

 

工具2.1图像分析工作表_

TOOL 2.1: IMAGE ANALYSIS WORKSHEET


说明:查看列克星敦格林战役的三幅图像(来源2.1、2.2、2.3 并考虑这些问题

Directions: Look at the three images of the Battle at Lexington Green (Sources 2.1, 2.2, 2.3) and consider these questions.

A) 您在每张图像中注意到哪些细节?

A) What details do you notice in each image?

图像

B) 每幅图像中哪些细节是相同的?

B) What details are the same in each image?

C) 有哪些细节不同?

C) What details are different?

D) 每幅图像中如何描绘英国军队?

D) How are the British troops portrayed in each image?

E) 爱国者是如何被描绘的?

E) How are the patriots portrayed?

F) 根据这些图像,您认为“列克星敦之战”真的是一场战斗吗?哪些细节让您得出结论?

F) Based on these images, do you think the “Battle at Lexington” was really a battle? What details lead you to your conclusion?

G) 看完这些图片后你有什么新问题?

G) What new questions do you have after looking at these images?

H) 阅读来源 2.42.5。这些来源支持图像中的哪些细节?

H) Read Sources 2.4 and 2.5. What details in the images do these sources support?

工具2.2采购工作

TOOL 2.2: SOURCING WORKSHEET


请参阅约翰·巴克 (John Barker) 的日记以及纳撒尼尔·马利肯 (Nathaniel Mulliken) 和其他民兵的证词(来源 2.42.5)。

Refer to the diary entry of John Barker and the deposition of Nathaniel Mulliken and the other Minutemen (Sources 2.4 and 2.5).

  1. 我们对这些文档的作者了解多少?









  2. What do we know about the author(s) of each of these documents?









  3. 这些信息如何影响我们是否相信作者?









  4. How does this information influence whether or not we believe the authors?









  5. 解释这两个文件的体裁之间的差异:日记与宣誓证词有何不同?









  6. Explain the difference between the genres of these two documents: How is a diary different from a sworn deposition?









  7. 关于巴克的日记,请提供一个你可能信任它的理由。您可能不信任它的原因之一是什么?









  8. Regarding Barker’s diary, provide one reason that you might trust it. What is one reason you might distrust it?









  9. 巴克的日记是在哪一天写的?从巴克写日记到他描述的事件经过了多长时间?有什么办法可以绝对确定吗?这篇文章可能是几天后写的吗?









  10. On what day was Barker’s diary entry written? How much time elapsed between Barker writing in his diary and the event he describes? Is there any way to be absolutely sure? Could this entry have been written days later?









  11. 关于马利肯的证词,请提供一个您可能信任它的理由。您可能不信任它的原因之一是什么?









  12. Regarding Mulliken’s deposition, provide one reason that you might trust it. What is one reason you might distrust it?









  13. 知道这份证词已发送给议会中的殖民地代表本杰明·富兰克林,您如何判断其可信度?
  14. How does knowing that this deposition was sent to the colonial representative in Parliament, Benjamin Franklin, inform your judgment of its trustworthiness?

建议资源

Suggested Resources

http://www.nps.gov/mima

http://www.nps.gov/mima

该国家公园管理局页面提供了“民兵”国家历史公园的各种资源,包括历史概述、照片和多媒体,以及课程材料和教师专业发展机会。

This National Park Service page offers a variety of resources from “Minute Man” National Historical Park, including a historical overview, photographs and multimedia, and curricular materials and professional development opportunities for teachers.

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/today/apr19.html

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/today/apr19.html

该页面由美国国会图书馆运营,提供丰富的主要来源材料,包括地图、个人文件以及列克星敦格林冲突发生后拍摄的原始证词。

This page, run by the Library of Congress, offers rich primary source material, including access to maps, personal papers, and the original depositions taken after the conflict on Lexington Green took place.

http://www.lexingtonhistory.org/

http://www.lexingtonhistory.org/

该网站由列克星敦历史学会运营,提供列克星敦历史建筑的照片和描述,例如巴克曼酒馆(Buckman Tavern),它最著名的是民兵总部。

This site is run by the Lexington Historical Society and offers photographs and descriptions of historic buildings in Lexington such as Buckman Tavern, best known as the headquarters of the Minutemen.

http://www.masshist.org/revolution/lexington.php

http://www.masshist.org/revolution/lexington.php

该网站由马萨诸塞州历史学会维护,提供列克星敦和康科德事件的历史概述、支持主要文件以及重点关注美国革命爆发的课程计划。

This site, maintained by the Massachusetts Historical Society, features a historical overview of the events at Lexington and Concord, supporting primary documents, and lesson plans focusing on the onset of the American Revolution.

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?subcategory=74

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?subcategory=74

该页面与阿什布鲁克中心合作创建,包含许多与美国革命爆发相关的主要来源文件,包括托马斯·盖奇将军和约翰·皮特凯恩少校的文件。

This page, created in partnership with the Ashbrook Center, features a number of primary source documents related to the onset of the American Revolution, including the documents of General Thomas Gage and Major John Pitcairn.

http://edsitement.neh.gov/view_lesson_plan.asp?id=679#01

http://edsitement.neh.gov/view_lesson_plan.asp?id=679#01

该网站由国家人文基金会、威瑞森基金会和国家人文信托基金会合作创建,提供有关美国北方革命的课程。建议的第一项活动侧重于“世界各地听到的声音”,并利用了许多主要来源。

This site, created by a partnership among the National Endowment for the Humanities, the Verizon Foundation, and the National Trust for the Humanities, features a lesson on the American Revolution in the North. The first of the suggested activities focuses on “The Shot Heard ’Round the World” and utilizes a number of primary sources.

http://historicalthinkingmatters.org/why/

http://historicalthinkingmatters.org/why/

此页面位于历史思维问题网站上,使用列克星敦格林战役的案例来展示和解释历史阅读和思维,并包括历史学家在分析主要来源文献时大声思考。

This page, featured on the Historical Thinking Matters website, uses the case of the battle at Lexington Green to show and explain historical reading and thinking, and includes historians thinking out loud as they analyze primary source documents.

 

 


第3章

CHAPTER 3


林肯的背景

Lincoln in Context

我无意在白人和黑人之间引入政治和社会平等。两者之间存在身体差异,根据我的判断,这可能会永远禁止他们在完全平等的基础上生活在一起,并且由于必须存在差异,所以我……赞成种族竞争我属于其中,拥有优越的地位。(亚伯拉罕·林肯 1858 年 8 月 21 日在伊利诺伊州渥太华对斯蒂芬·A·道格拉斯的答复)1

I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and black races. There is a physical difference between the two, which in my judgment will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality, and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I … am in favor of the race to which I belong, having the superior position. (Abraham Lincoln’s reply to Stephen A. Douglas at Ottawa, Illinois, August 21, 1858)1

图像

塞缪尔·阿尔舒勒. 林肯的照片。1857.伊利诺伊州厄巴纳。

网址:http://memory.loc.gov/service/rbc/lprbscsm/scsm0971/001r.jpg

Samuel Alschuler. Photograph of Lincoln. 1857. Urbana, IL.

Available at http://memory.loc.gov/service/rbc/lprbscsm/scsm0971/001r.jpg

如今,这些话听起来很无礼,是过去时代的遗物,很少有人哀悼或浪漫化。他们宣扬的态度是对美国理想的憎恶,许多读者会惊讶地发现这些话是亚伯拉罕·林肯说的。写下《解放奴隶宣言》和葛底斯堡激动人心的话语的人怎么可能对那些让我们现代人如此厌恶的传达种族优越感的话语负责呢?

Today these words sound offensive, a relic of bygone times that few mourn or romanticize. They broadcast an attitude that is anathema to American ideals, and many readers will be shocked to learn that they were uttered by Abraham Lincoln. How could the man who wrote the Emancipation Proclamation and the stirring words at Gettysburg be responsible for words that convey a racial superiority so distasteful to our modern ears?

这些话与美国人对亚伯拉罕·林肯作为“伟大的解放者”的理解背道而驰。它们促使读者接受林肯的另一个愿景:“白人至上主义者”。事实上,《Ebony》杂志编辑小莱罗内·贝内特 (Lerone Bennett, Jr.) 在 1968 年发表了一篇著名文章,提出了这一观点:“安倍·林肯是白人至上主义者吗?” 2贝内特声称,美国人的林肯是一个自我感觉良好的创造物,林肯实际上是一位白人至上主义者,尽管是出于善意。他是一位保守派政客,只对政治需要做出反应,并通过种族主义笑话展现自己的真面目。

These words fly in the face of Americans’ understanding of Abraham Lincoln as the “Great Emancipator.” They prompt readers to embrace another vision of Lincoln: “White Supremacist.” In fact, Ebony magazine editor Lerone Bennett, Jr. made that very call in 1968 with a famous article asking, “Was Abe Lincoln a White Supremacist?”2 Bennett claimed that Americans’ Lincoln was a feel-good creation, and that Lincoln was actually a White supremacist, albeit a well-intentioned one. He was a conservative politician who responded only to political necessity, and showed his true colors through racist jokes.

贝内特的文章促使学者们正视林肯的种族主义问题。随后进行了更深入、更广泛的对话,著名历史学家重新审视并认真思考林肯对奴隶制和种族的看法问题。历史学家想知道这个悖论(林肯作为《解放黑人奴隶宣言》的作者和白人至上的信徒)是否是在事后一个多世纪后对这个人进行判断的问题,或者林肯在他的同时代人看来是否也显得矛盾。这些话对于 1858 年听到的人来说意味着什么?

Bennett’s article prompted scholars to confront the question of Lincoln’s racism. A deeper and more extended conversation ensued, with eminent historians revisiting and seriously considering the question of Lincoln’s views on slavery and race. Historians wondered if this paradox (Lincoln as author of the Emancipation Proclamation and as believer in White supremacy) was a matter of judging the man more than a century after the fact, or whether Lincoln also appeared paradoxical to his contemporaries. What did these words mean to those who heard them in 1858?

历史学家努力在林肯所处的时代背景下理解他的观点,这需要建立联系。林肯并不是生活在真空中。他的言论和行动与他所处的世界的具体情况深深地交织在一起。上下文一词源自拉丁语,意思是“编织在一起”。历史情境化是指努力理解历史现象(言论、人物、事件),因为它们存在于原来的世界中,以便以它们自己的方式而不是通过现代视角来理解它们。

Historians worked to understand Lincoln’s views in the context of his own time, and this required making connections. Lincoln did not live in a vacuum; his speeches and actions were deeply intertwined with the particulars of his world. The word context has Latin roots that mean “to weave together.” Contextualizing in history is about working to understand historical phenomena—speeches, people, events—as they existed in their original worlds in order to understand them on their own terms rather than through a modern lens.

我们无法将本章开头的话与说出这些话的场合(与斯蒂芬·A·道格拉斯(Stephen A. Douglas)就激烈竞争的参议员席位进行辩论)分开。这场辩论的地点(伊利诺伊州渥太华,反黑人情绪的温床);听到辩论的人类型(主要支持道格拉斯,怀疑林肯);事实上,林肯和道格拉斯都不是以先知或道德家的身份向观众讲话,而是以争取选票的候选人的身份。我们也不能忽视道格拉斯所说的话引发了这种反应,或者林肯在本章开头摘录之后所说的话。情境化的行为需要考虑各种各样的因素,从当今的意识形态到特定的短语和句子序列。但在所有情况下,

We cannot separate the words that began this chapter from the occasion on which they were uttered (a debate with Stephen A. Douglas for a fiercely contested senatorial seat); the location of this debate (Ottawa, Illinois, a hotbed of anti-Black sentiment); the kinds of people who heard the debate (largely supportive of Douglas and suspicious of Lincoln); and the fact that both Lincoln and Douglas addressed their audience not as prophets or moralists but as candidates courting votes. Nor can we ignore what Douglas said to spark this response, or the words Lincoln uttered that immediately follow the excerpt at the start of this chapter. The act of contextualizing requires considering a wide-ranging variety of factors, from the ideologies of the day to a particular sequence of phrases and sentences. But in all cases, it demands that historical artifacts and sources be recognized as human constructions that existed within a particular social world, and as such, cannot be considered as free-floating evidence that speaks for itself.

林肯是种族主义者吗?分析问题

Was Lincoln a Racist? Analyzing the Question

林肯是否是一名种族主义者的问题并不是一个普通的问题。它将美国最受欢迎的偶像之一与其最应受谴责的遗产和思想之一联系起来。光是这个问题就能引起热烈的回应,而令人信服地回答它既不容易也不容易。

The question of whether Lincoln was a racist is no ordinary one. It links one of America’s favorite icons with one of its most reprehensible legacies and ideas. The question alone can elicit passionate responses, and answering it convincingly is neither easy nor quick.

首先,揭示一个人的真诚信念是很困难的。即使在最好的情况下,这对历史学家来说也不是一件容易的事——如何进入一个人的思想?况且,谁一生一世不会改变自己的想法呢?一年表达某件事是否意味着说话者下一年就会相信它?然后是一致性问题。一个人是全有还是全无——种族主义者还是平等主义者?我们能否辨别一个人的观点何时是绝对的,何时这些观点可能是混合的、试探性的或不确定的?

First there is the difficulty of uncovering a person’s sincere beliefs. Even in the best cases, this is not an easy task for the historian—how do you get inside a man’s mind? Moreover, who does not change his or her mind over a lifetime? Does expressing something one year mean that the speaker believes it the next? And then there is the matter of consistency. Is a man all or nothing—racist or egalitarian? Can we discern when a man is absolute in his views and when those views may be mixed, tentative, or uncertain?

关于“种族主义”一词的问题也出现了,这个词在林肯时代并不存在。3它的使用是否不合时宜?我们是否以非历史的方式将现代观念强加于过去的情况?种族主义与当今的美国以及理解我们的过去有着巨大的关系。但用当今的措辞来表述这个问题会引发历史上的一个中心紧张局势:虽然今天的担忧可能会促使历史调查,但它们不应该淹没或扭曲过去的现实。

Questions also arise about the term “racist,” a word that didn’t exist in Lincoln’s time.3 Is its use anachronistic? Are we imposing modern ideas on past situations in an ahistorical way? Racism has enormous relevance to today’s America and to understanding our past. But phrasing the question in present-day terms raises a central tension in history: While today’s concerns may prompt historical investigations, they should not swamp or distort the realities of the past.

尽管如此,即使考虑到这些限制,历史学家仍在追寻这个问题。4为了辨别含义并揭示林肯的观点,他们努力在原始上下文中分析他的话。

Still, even given these limitations, historians have pursued the question.4 And to discern meaning and uncover Lincoln’s views, they strive to analyze his words within their original context.

来源

The Sources

哪些来源阐明了林肯的种族观点?他出示了大量文件证据。他不断写作并留下信件、笔记和备忘录、演讲、法律论证、政策声明以及其中许多内容的修订版和草案。5历史学家道格拉斯·威尔逊 (Douglas Wilson) 解释说,“[林肯]对他担任总统期间的几乎每一个重要发展以及许多不那么重要的发展都做出了一些写作的回应。” 6

What sources illuminate Lincoln’s views on race? He produced a huge cache of documentary evidence. He wrote constantly and left behind letters, notes and memos, speeches, legal arguments, policy statements, and revisions and drafts of many of these.5 Historian Douglas Wilson explained that “[Lincoln] responded to almost every important development during his presidency, and to many that were not so important, with some act of writing.”6

然后是令人回忆的见证。林肯去世后,他超过 15 年的法律合伙人威廉·赫恩登 (William Herndon) 收集了许多认识他的人的故事。然后他写了一本关于他的前合伙人的传记。历史学家对这部作品持怀疑态度,因为他与林肯保持着冷静的个人关系,以及撰写有关被杀总统的文章所带来的经济机会。尽管如此,赫恩登收集的故事增加了有关林肯的证据。历史学家还可以查看当时所有可用的原始材料来了解林肯(例如报纸、其他人的论文、法律摘要和判决)。

Then there is the reminiscent testimony. After Lincoln’s death, William Herndon, his law partner for more than 15 years, collected stories from many who knew him. He then wrote a biography of his former partner. Historians are skeptical of this work, given the cool personal relationship he maintained with Lincoln, as well as the financial opportunities bound up with writing about the slain president. Nevertheless, the stories Herndon collected add to the evidence about Lincoln. Historians can also look at all the source material available from the time to understand Lincoln (e.g., newspapers, other people’s papers, legal briefs and decisions).

即使有这么多的主要资料来源,在种族问题上也很难确定林肯的情况。历史学家不得不将神话般的林肯与这个人区分开来。林肯传记作家大卫·赫伯特·唐纳德将他描述为一位多才多艺的偶像,对于不同的群体来说,“他是一名共产主义者……也是一名素食主义者、社会主义者、禁酒主义者、绿背主义者和现在联盟的支持者。” 7由于林肯已成为美国理想的“中心象征”,历史学家必须努力将真正的林肯与象征性的林肯区分开来。8他们从事这项工作已有数十年,并产生了大量学术成果。

Even with this large pool of primary sources, it is hard to pin down Lincoln when it comes to race. Historians have had to disentangle the mythic Lincoln from the man. Lincoln biographer David Herbert Donald described him as a versatile icon, that for different groups “he was a Communist … also a vegetarian, a socialist, a prohibitionist, a greenbacker, and a proponent of Union Now.”7 Because Lincoln has become the “central symbol” of American ideals, historians have to work to distinguish the real Lincoln from the symbolic.8 They have been doing this work for decades and have produced a vast body of scholarship.

尽管如此,“真正的”林肯仍然难以捉摸。被历史学家描述为“令人费解的混合物”,被同时代人描述为“沉默寡言”和“神秘莫测”,林肯万神殿中一本广受好评的书被称为《无人知晓的林肯》是有充分理由9作者理查德·卡伦特 (Richard Current) 将林肯文献中的某些主题描述为有争议的,并解释说“证据相互矛盾,同样公正和消息灵通的学生对其解释存在分歧。” 10林肯对种族和奴隶制的看法体现了一个棘手的话题。

Still, the “real” Lincoln remains elusive. Described as a “puzzling mixture” by historians, “reticent” and “secretive” by his contemporaries, it is with good reason that an acclaimed book in the Lincoln pantheon is called The Lincoln Nobody Knows.9 Author Richard Current described certain topics in the Lincoln literature as controversial, explaining that the “evidence is tangled in contradictions, and equally fair-minded and well-informed students disagree in their interpretation of it.”10 Lincoln’s views on race and slavery exemplify a tangled topic.

我们在下面讨论对林肯观点研究至关重要的四个来源,以及第五个可以帮助正确理解林肯言论的来源。这些资料来源跨越 1841 年至 1863 年,这是美国历史上发生重大变化的时期。内战前的三十年见证了纳特·特纳的叛乱,威廉·劳埃德·加里森的报纸《解放者》诞生、旨在解决这些领土上奴隶制问题的立法、剥夺黑人公民身份的德雷德·斯科特决定,以及从哈珀斯费里到“血腥堪萨斯”骚乱的暴力行为。不同团体采取了极端立场:一方面,废奴主义者呼吁立即结束奴隶制;另一方面,主张废除奴隶制。另一方面,支持奴隶制的派系称赞奴隶制是受圣经认可的受祝福的制度。正是在这种背景下,必须考虑这些来源。

We discuss below four sources that are central to the study of Lincoln’s views, and a fifth that can help put Lincoln’s words in perspective. These sources span the period 1841–1863, a time of significant change in American history. The three decades preceding the Civil War saw Nat Turner’s Rebellion, the birth of William Lloyd Garrison’s newspaper The Liberator, legislative acts meant to settle the question of slavery in the territories, the Dred Scott decision denying Blacks citizenship, and acts of violence from Harpers Ferry to the riots of “Bloody Kansas.” Different groups adopted extreme positions: On the one hand, the abolitionists called for an immediate end to slavery; on the other, pro-slavery factions praised slavery as a blessed institution sanctioned by the Bible. It is against this backdrop that these sources must be considered.

林肯-道格拉斯辩论。1858 年的林肯-道格拉斯辩论是政治史上最著名的事件之一。伊利诺伊州议员林肯向现任美国参议员斯蒂芬·道格拉斯发起一系列辩论。道格拉斯同意在伊利诺伊州的七个城镇与林肯进行辩论。11辩论是一场精心设计的活动,配有游行乐队、野餐、烟花和横幅——这是 19 世纪人群的主要娱乐来源。每场辩论都遵循相同的形式:三个小时激动人心的演讲,不时响起人群的欢呼、笑声、嘲笑和掌声。12出席的记者报道的报道刊登在全国各地的报纸上,辩论吸引了全国观众。

Lincoln-Douglas Debates. The 1858 Lincoln-Douglas debates are one of the most famous events in political history. Lincoln, an Illinois state legislator, challenged incumbent U.S. Senator Stephen Douglas to a series of debates. Douglas agreed to debate Lincoln in seven Illinois towns.11 The debates were elaborate events, complete with marching bands, picnics, fireworks, and banners—a major source of entertainment for the 19th-century crowds. Each debate followed the same format: three hours of rousing oratory punctuated by the crowd’s cheers, laughter, jeers, and applause.12 The reporters in attendance filed stories that were printed in newspapers around the country, and the debates drew a national audience.

虽然林肯与道格拉斯的辩论通常被纳入历史教科书,但他们的叙述主要集中在“外表和声音”,很少关注所说的话或所拥护的想法。13正在争论的重大问题是什么?

While the Lincoln-Douglas debates are routinely included in history textbooks, their accounts focus on “appearances and voices,” with little if any attention paid to the words spoken or the ideas espoused.13 What were the great issues being debated?

奴隶制向西方领土的扩张是争论的核心。1850 年代,宣布北纬 36°30 英寸以北的领土永远禁止奴隶制的《密苏里妥协案》被废除。这一变革的缔造者道格拉斯支持这些领土上的人民主权,使西方定居者能够批准在他们的地区实行奴隶制。新领土可以举行选举来确立其奴隶制或自由土地的地位。1854 年的《堪萨斯-内布拉斯加州法案》加剧了西部扩张和奴隶制的紧张局势,其中最暴力的表现是“流血的堪萨斯”。在这种背景下,历史学家一致认为 1850 年代是一个充满恶毒种族主义的时代,当时许多地方都否认黑皮肤人的人性。

The expansion of slavery into the Western territories was at the heart of the debates. In the 1850s, the Missouri Compromise, which declared territories north of the 36°30” latitude forever off limits to slavery, was repealed. Douglas, the architect of this change, supported popular sovereignty in the territories, making it possible for Western settlers to approve slavery in their region. New territories could hold elections to establish their status as slaveholding or free soil. The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 escalated tensions over westward expansion and slavery, the most violent manifestation being “Bleeding Kansas.” Given this backdrop, historians agree that the 1850s was a time of virulent racism, when the very humanity of dark-skinned people was denied in many quarters.

“与白人平等。” 第一份文件(来源 3.1)摘自 1858 年 8 月 21 日在伊利诺伊州渥太华举行的第一次辩论,开头是道格拉斯声称林肯(和“黑人共和党”)支持黑人公民身份和权利,包括黑人的权利。投票并在陪审团和民选职位中任职。道格拉斯确立了自己的立场,即“赞成将公民身份限制在白人身上”,并反对“任何形式的”黑人公民身份。他接着声称林肯(以及废奴主义者)相信“黑人生来平等”并且“全能的上帝赋予了平等”。

“The Equal of the White Man.” The first document (Source 3.1), an excerpt from the first debate in Ottawa, Illinois, on August 21, 1858, begins with Douglas’s claim that Lincoln (and the “Black Republican party”) supported Black citizenship and rights, including the right to vote and serve on juries and in elected office. Douglas established his own position as being “in favor of confining citizenship to white men,” and opposed to Negro citizenship “in any and every form.” He went on to claim that Lincoln (alongside the abolitionists) believed that the “Negro was born his equal” and was “endowed with equality by the Almighty.”

道格拉斯在现代读者熟悉的背景下——政治竞选——在自己和他的挑战者之间建立了对比。尽管一场长达 3 小时的 19 世纪辩论对我们来说可能有点太多了,但我们可以体会到竞选演讲以及候选人为了赢得观众认可而调整自己的言辞。

Douglas set up a contrast between himself and his challenger in what is a familiar context to the modern reader: the political campaign. Although a 3-hour 19th-century debate may seem a bit much to us, we can relate to the campaign stump speech and candidates who calibrate their words to win audience approval.

历史学家埃里克·福纳 (Eric Foner) 称共和党亲黑人的指控是 1850 年代最常用的“民主党政治武器库中的武器”。14特别是在西方,民主党押注将共和党与“黑人平等”联系起来将使民主党赢得选举。政治光谱各派人士都将倡导黑人平等视为政治自杀:没有足够的选民支持这一纲领。更常见的是对黑人的仇恨和恐惧,这在全国所有地区都是如此,而不仅仅是在蓄奴的南方。

Historian Eric Foner called charges that the Republicans were pro-Negro the 1850s’ most utilized “weapon in the Democrats’ political arsenal.”14 Especially in the West, the Democratic Party bet that linking the Republicans to “Negro equality” would win the Democrats the election. People on all sides of the political spectrum saw advocacy of Negro equality as political suicide: Not enough voters supported this platform. More common were feelings of hate and fear toward Blacks, and this held true in all regions of the country, not just in the slaveholding South.

这是一个“种族偏见几乎普遍存在”的时代,四个“自由”州甚至不允许黑人进入其领土。15表示支持禁止奴隶制,甚至完全废除奴隶制,并不等于倡导黑人权利,更不用说平等了。白人工人不想与奴隶劳动竞争,也不想与自由黑人竞争可用的工作。让西方摆脱奴隶制更多的是与 1840 年代自由土地党的政治纲领有关,而不是与反奴隶制的热情有关。自由土壤者强调努力工作和公平竞争是白人经济自我改善的关键。保持西部地区没有奴隶劳动将确保这种“公平”竞争,并实现这片土地的承诺,坚持不懈和能力得到回报。简而言之,在这些领土上投票反对奴隶制的人们往往是出于自身利益,而不是出于对奴隶制的道德疑虑。

This was an era when “racial prejudice was all but universal” and four “free” states wouldn’t even let Negroes into their territory.15 Evincing support for the prohibition of slavery, or even abolishing it altogether, did not equate to advocating Negro rights, let alone equality. White workers did not want to compete with slave labor nor compete with free Blacks for available jobs. Keeping the West free of slaves had more to do with the Free Soil Party’s political platform in the 1840s than it did with anti-slavery passion. Free Soilers emphasized hard work and fair competition as the key to economic self-improvement for White men. Keeping the Western territories free of slave labor would ensure this “fair” competition, and fulfill the promise of a land where perseverance and ability paid off. In short, the people who voted down slavery in the territories often did so based on self-interest, rather than moral qualms about slavery.

在第一份文件中,我们听到斯蒂芬·道格拉斯对这种心态的关注。他的话让我们感到震惊和不安。很难想象这样一个世界:“我赞成将公民身份限制在白人、欧洲出生和血统的男性身上,而不是将公民身份授予黑人、印第安人和其他劣等种族”这句话能获得选票。但我们不能忘记参议院选举的结果。道格拉斯赢了。

In the first document, we hear Stephen Douglas’s attention to this mindset. His words jar and upset us. It is hard to imagine a world in which the words “I am in favor of confining citizenship to White men, men of European birth and descent, instead of conferring it upon Negroes, Indians and other inferior races” get votes. But we can’t forget the outcome of the Senate election. Douglas won.

我们听到林肯在他的答复中考虑了这种意识形态气候和背景(来源 3.2)。他小心翼翼地与道格拉斯无情地抛弃在他角落里的“小废奴演说家”保持距离,并表示他不会干涉已经存在的奴隶制。林肯关注的是奴隶制向西扩张的问题。这使得任何反对扩大奴隶制的选民,无论出于何种原因,都可以支持林肯。正是这样的举动促使历史学家和古典学家加里·威尔斯称赞林肯“以政治上可以管理的方式定义了奴隶制问题”。16林肯以对这一成就至关重要的方式对他的言论进行了区分和限定。

We hear Lincoln considering this ideological climate, this context, in his reply (Source 3.2). He carefully distanced himself from the “little abolition orators” whom Douglas ungraciously dumped in his corner, and stated that he would not interfere with slavery where it already existed. Lincoln focused on the question of slavery’s westward expansion. This allowed any voter against expansion of slavery, regardless of the reason, to give his support to Lincoln. It is moves like this one that prompted historian and classicist Garry Wills to credit Lincoln with “defining the issue of slavery in politically manageable terms.”16 Lincoln made distinctions and qualified his statements in ways critical to that accomplishment.

自然权利和政治权利。最初,林肯否认有任何在种族之间引入政治和社会平等的愿望,这一信息一定让他的听众松了口气并赢得了掌声。他承认种族之间存在身体差异,并认为这些差异加大了黑人和白人可以享有“完美平等”的社会的可能性。在这里,他表示自己同意道格拉斯的观点,即考虑到这种可能性,白人将拥有优势地位。但林肯言论的偶然性与道格拉斯的言论形成鲜明对比。

Natural Rights and Political Rights. Initially, Lincoln denied any desire to introduce political and social equality between the races, a message that must have drawn relief and applause from his audience. He acknowledged physical differences between the races and credited these with stacking the odds against a society where Blacks and Whites could share “perfect equality.” Here he marked himself in agreement with Douglas that, given such odds, the White population would have the superior position. But the contingency of Lincoln’s remarks stands in contrast to Douglas’s.

林肯在平等问题上采取了不同的方针,远离社会和政治平等,转向自然权利和享受劳动成果的权利。他断言,在这些方面,黑人“与白人一样……享有同样的权利”。社会、政治、自然、经济——所有这些不同种类的权利。林肯为何做出这些区分?

Lincoln took a different tack on the question of equality, away from social and political equality, toward natural rights and the right to enjoy the fruits of one’s labor. In these, he asserted, the Negro is “as much entitled … as the White man.” Social, political, natural, economic—all these different kinds of rights. Why did Lincoln make these distinctions?

当今的反黑人意识形态部分回答了这个问题。林肯制定了一种关注黑人奴隶人性的意识形态,与那些将奴隶视为非人类的人形成鲜明对比。在林肯的法律实践中,他称“抓住案件的核心问题”疙瘩。” 1858 年林肯对黑人所表明的立场的“核心”是,作为人类,他们享有《独立宣言》中规定的自然权利。

The anti-Black ideology of the day partly answers this question. Lincoln crafted an ideology that focused on the humanity of the Black slave, in contrast to those who saw slaves as subhuman. In Lincoln’s law practice he called getting at the core issue in a case “getting at the nub.” The “nub” of Lincoln’s stated position on Blacks in 1858 was that as human beings, they were due natural rights as stated in the Declaration of Independence.

林肯对各种平等的区分伴随着对冲和谨慎的语言。虽然他确实承认两组之间存在身体差异,但他在其他比较中却模棱两可。只是“也许”存在道德或智力禀赋上的差异。即使提出两个种族在道德和智力上同等的可能性,也会完全违背他那个时代的盛行风气。

Lincoln’s distinctions between kinds of equality are accompanied by hedging and careful language. While he does admit a physical difference between the two groups, he equivocates in his other comparisons. There is only “perhaps” a difference in moral or intellectual endowment. Even raising the possibility that the two races were morally and intellectually equivalent would go squarely against the prevailing winds of his day.

对于现代人来说,林肯的杰出地位和资历可能显得微不足道,甚至具有欺骗性,这是一个为了击败对手而愿意说出任何话的政客的运作方式。但考虑到他的世界,他公开表达的想法比大多数其他白人的想法更加进步(废奴主义者是一个重要的例外)。林肯在这些辩论中阐述的观点将团结共和党。17正如历史学家埃里克·福纳 (Eric Foner) 指出的那样,共和党人

Lincoln’s distinctions and qualifications might seem trivial and even deceptive to the modern ear, the workings of a politico willing to say whatever was needed to best his opponent. But given his world, his publicly expressed ideas were more progressive than those of most other Whites (abolitionists being the significant exception). The views that Lincoln articulated in these debates would unify the Republican party.17 As historian Eric Foner notes, the Republicans

确实制定了一项政策,承认黑人的基本人性,并要求保护民主党否认的某些基本权利。尽管由于接受许多种族成见而存在严重缺陷,而且有限……共和党在种族关系上的立场与 1850 年代的主流观点背道而驰,并被证明是种族主义社会中明显的政治责任。18

did develop a policy which recognized the essential humanity of the Negro, and demanded protection for certain basic rights which the Democrats denied him. Although deeply flawed by an acceptance of many racial stereotypes, and limited … the Republican stand on race relations went against the prevailing opinion of the 1850’s, and proved a distinct political liability in a racist society.18

林肯的立场显然不像他那个时代的废奴主义那么激进,但它对奴隶共同人性的关注是不容谈判的,如果要接受任何最终的解放,这也是逻辑上的必然。林肯始终关注公众舆论和现行法律,在平等立场上既没有逼得太紧,也没有让步太多。相反,他采取了一条允许各种反奴隶制选民加入他的道路。他可能在 1858 年的参议院选举中落败,但他的谨慎行事让他在 1860 年当选总统。

Lincoln’s stance was obviously not as radical as the abolitionism of his day, but its focus on the shared humanity of the slave was non-negotiable and a logical necessity if any eventual emancipation were to be accepted. Always attentive to public opinion and existing law, Lincoln neither pushed too hard nor conceded too much with his stance on equality. Instead, he took a path that allowed anti-slavery voters of all stripes to join him. He might have lost a Senate election in 1858, but his careful path allowed him to be elected president in 1860.

给玛丽·斯皮德的信。该集中的第三份文件(来源 3.3)将我们带回到 1841 年,比林肯-道格拉斯辩论早了 15 年多。这是林肯写给他最亲密的朋友之一约书亚·斯皮德同父异母的妹妹的一封私人信件。与林肯在参议院辩论中公开讲话的风格和形式不同,它很少透露林肯作为政治家的信息,而更多地透露了他的朋友所熟知的私人人物。但如果我们仔细观察,我们会发现这与他 1858 年关于奴隶人性的声明是一致的。也就是说,这封信还包括令现代读者震惊的段落。

Letter to Mary Speed. The third document in the set (Source 3.3) takes us back to 1841, more than 15 years before the Lincoln-Douglas debates. It is a private letter Lincoln wrote to the half-sister of Joshua Speed, one of his closest friends. Different in style and form from Lincoln’s public words at the senatorial debates, it reveals little about Lincoln the politician and more of the private man known by his friends. But if we look closely, we see a consistency with his 1858 statements regarding the humanity of the slave. That said, this letter also includes passages that shock the modern reader.

这封信描述了密西西比河船上的一次旅程,一群奴隶实际上被沿着河流出售,“永远与他们的童年、他们的朋友、他们的父亲和母亲、兄弟和兄弟的场景分离”,林肯写道。姐妹们,其中许多人都是她们的妻子和孩子。” 但随着这封信的继续,它呈现出令人困惑的对比,引发了对其确切含义的争论。当林肯回忆起奴隶们在近距离被锁在一起的景象时,他感动地不是在谈论人类的苦难,而是在谈论人类的幸福。同样的场景可能会激起任何废奴主义者的愤怒和愤慨,但林肯却写下了这样的文字,这些文字可以被理解为“通过推断黑人具有处理囚禁的特殊能力来改善奴隶制的恐怖”。19

The letter describes a journey on a Mississippi riverboat on which a group of slaves were literally being sold down the river, “separated forever,” Lincoln writes, “from the scenes of their childhood, their friends, their fathers and mothers, and brothers and sisters, and many of them, from their wives and children.” But as the letter continues, it presents a perplexing contrast that has prompted debate about its exact meaning. As he recalled the spectacle of slaves chained together in close quarters, Lincoln was moved to remark not on human misery, but on human happiness. The same scene that would have provoked fury and outrage in any abolitionist inspired Lincoln to write words that can be read as “ameliorat[ing] slavery’s horror with an inference that blacks have a special capacity to deal with captivity.”19

然而,仔细观察,我们发现林肯对奴隶快乐活动的描述传达了一种信念,即奴隶与白人拥有共同的人性。奴隶对其处境的反应被描述为“一个很好的例子……思考条件对人类幸福的影响……[并且上帝]使人类最糟糕的条件变得可以忍受。” 这些短语不会消除现代读者对被描述为快乐和开朗的被奴役者的不安。但考虑到 19 世纪中叶有关奴隶制和黑人的观念,它们意义重大。

However, on closer inspection, we see that Lincoln’s description of the slaves’ happy activities communicates a belief that slaves shared a common humanity with Whites. The slaves’ response to their situation is presented as “a fine example … for contemplating the effect of condition upon human happiness … [and that God] renders the worst of human conditions tolerable.” Such phrases won’t still a modern-day reader’s discomfort over enslaved people described as happy and cheerful. But considered in the context of mid-19th-century ideas about slavery and the Negro, they are significant.

1830 年后,奴隶制和向西扩张的紧张局势加剧。威廉·劳埃德·加里森 (William Lloyd Garrison) 的废奴主义杂志《解放者》 (The Liberator )的出版以及 1831 年纳特·特纳 (Nat Turner) 的奴隶叛乱加剧了南北之间的分歧。废奴主义言论和对奴隶制制度的攻击促使支持奴隶制的思想家和派别发展理论来证明该制度及其持久性的合理性。20其中包括这样的论点:奴隶制实际上有利于其俘虏,以及黑人在基因上不同且不如白人。林肯在 1841 年的信中并不支持这两种立场。相反,他宣称奴隶也是人,奴隶制要对“人类最糟糕的状况”负责。

After 1830, tensions over slavery and westward expansion grew. Publication of The Liberator, William Lloyd Garrison’s abolitionist magazine, and Nat Turner’s slave rebellion in 1831 sharpened the divide between North and South. Abolitionist rhetoric and assaults on the institution of slavery propelled pro-slavery thinkers and factions to develop theories to justify the institution and its permanence.20 These included arguments that slavery actually benefited its captives and that Blacks were genetically different and inferior to Whites. In his 1841 letter, Lincoln embraces neither stance. Rather, he declares slaves to be human beings and slavery responsible for “the worst of human conditions.”

这封速递信还提出了其他问题。它是历史学家如何继续询问消息来源以揭示林肯对种族的看法的一个例子,但几乎找不到表面上的答案。由于林肯的话几乎不关心奴隶的苦难,因此可以被解读为冷酷无情且不关心奴隶制给人类造成的代价。然而,对于林肯学者菲利普·帕鲁丹来说,这表明需要提出更多问题。21在写给玛丽·斯皮德(一位生活在蓄奴州肯塔基州的妇女)的信中,林肯是否因为害怕冒犯她而不愿抱怨奴隶制?林肯是否在做他妻子认为的他的本性——最少谈论他最感受的事情?或者他真的相信黑人在“人类最糟糕的条件”下遭受的苦难比其他人少?帕鲁丹想知道林肯对奴隶苦难的思考是否受到他的听众或他自己的隐私感的影响。尽管如此,林肯麻木不仁的问题并没有改变他话语中的观点。他认为黑人是人,奴隶制是残酷的制度。

The Speed letter raises other questions. It serves as an example of how historians continue to interrogate sources to uncover Lincoln’s views on race, while finding few prima facie answers. Because Lincoln’s words show little concern for slaves’ suffering, they can be read as callous and unconcerned with the human costs of slavery. However, to Lincoln scholar Philip Paludan, what this shows is the need to ask more questions.21 In writing to Mary Speed, a woman who lived in the slaveholding state of Kentucky, was Lincoln loath to rail against slavery for fear of offending her? Was Lincoln doing what his wife identified as his true nature—talking the least about what he felt the most? Or did he really believe that Blacks suffered less than others in “the worst of human conditions”? Paludan wonders if Lincoln’s musings on the slaves’ suffering were tempered by his audience or his own sense of privacy. Still, the question of Lincoln’s insensitivity doesn’t change the ideas undergirding his words. He considered Blacks as human and slavery as a cruel system.

殖民化。1862 年 8 月 14 日,林肯总统向自由黑人代表团发表讲话,这是有史以来第一个受邀访问白宫的代表团。林肯与他们握手并发表了他的“殖民演讲”(来源3.4)。这些因素的组合令人费解。欢迎黑人入主白宫是否符合黑人大规模移民的信息?

Colonization. On August 14, 1862, President Lincoln addressed a delegation of free Black men, the first ever invited to the White House. Lincoln shook their hands and delivered his “Address on Colonization” (Source 3.4). The pairing of these factors is puzzling. Is welcoming Blacks into the White House consistent with a message of mass Black emigration?

殖民化。美国黑人移民到其他国家(这里指的是中美洲),以建立一个与他们用强迫劳动、血汗和泪水建立起来的社会不同的社会。我们怎么能判断这个计划不是最极端的种族隔离呢?

Colonization. The emigration of Black Americans to other lands—in this case, Central America—to create a separate society from the one they had built with their forced labor, blood, sweat, and tears. How can we judge this plan as anything but segregation at its most extreme?

自共和国诞生以来,殖民化的想法就一直存在。效仿 18 世纪末英国在塞拉利昂的做法,美国殖民协会于 1821 年在非洲西海岸建立了利比里亚。在 1830 年代之前,殖民是“白人反奴隶制情绪的主要体现”,但黑人反对奴隶制政策和激进废奴主义的兴起改变了这一点。22然而,殖民化仍然有其支持者,在战争爆发前的几年里,人们越来越关注殖民化作为一项实用政策。1861 年 12 月,林肯总统首次向国会发表讲话,要求国会授权拨款实施殖民计划,国会回应拨款 60 万美元。

The idea of colonization had been around since the birth of the Republic. Following the British example in Sierra Leone in the late 18th century, the American Colonization Society founded Liberia on the west coast of Africa in 1821. Before the 1830s colonization was the “main embodiment of white anti-slavery sentiment,” but Black opposition to the policy and the rise of radical abolitionism changed that.22 However, colonization continued to have its supporters, and the years immediately before the outbreak of war saw increased attention to it as a practical policy. When President Lincoln addressed Congress for the first time in December 1861, he asked them to authorize funds to carry out a colonization plan and Congress responded by appropriating $600,000.

历史学家一致认为,殖民运动从一开始就充满了相互冲突的目的。一些人支持这个想法,因为他们认为这是黑人能够生活在公平社会中的唯一途径——他们认为美国白人对黑人如此敌视,平等的权利和特权永远是遥不可及的。对于其他人来说,殖民化是莱隆·贝内特所说的“白人梦想”,一场让美国及其领土摆脱黑人的运动。23还有一些人将殖民视为传播基督教理想、同时与遥远的人口建立经济联系的机会。

Historians agree that the colonization movement was riddled with conflicting purposes from its start. Some supported the idea because they saw it as the only way that Blacks could live in an equitable society—they judged White America so hostile to Blacks that equal rights and privileges would always be out of reach. For others, colonization was what Lerone Bennett called a “white dream,” a movement to make the United States and its territories free of Blacks.23 Still others saw colonization as the opportunity to spread Christian ideals while forging economic ties with far-off populations.

林肯支持殖民化,但他对此的看法仍然使历史学家产生分歧和困惑。24他为什么支持这项政策?林肯对殖民化的支持是否是一个“心理安全阀”,旨在让恐惧的白人放心,解放将伴随着殖民化?25或者他反对种族混合,因此主张驱逐自由民?他在政治生涯中改变了对殖民的看法吗?

Lincoln supported colonization, but his views on it continue to divide and perplex historians.24 Why did he support this policy? Was Lincoln’s support for colonization a “psychological safety valve” meant to reassure fearful Whites that emancipation would be accompanied by colonization?25 Or was he against the races mixing and so advocated removing the freedmen? Did he change his mind about colonization during his political career?

哥伦比亚大学的埃里克·福纳认为,林肯对殖民的看法在他执政期间确实发生了变化,《解放奴隶宣言》是一个转折点。林肯从支持伴随逐步解放计划的殖民计划到完全放弃该政策。26林肯在执政之初主张逐步释放奴隶,补偿奴隶主,并将其与殖民化结合起来。在《解放奴隶宣言》和海地附近的瓦什岛黑人殖民实验失败后,他放弃了对该政策的支持。林肯最终批准了第十三修正案,并将选举权扩大到黑人退伍军人,这表明他可以将自由民视为美国公民。国会60万美元中他只花费了38,000美元,这一事实也表明殖民政策不再对他有利。

Columbia’s Eric Foner argued that Lincoln’s views on colonization did indeed change during his administration, and that the Emancipation Proclamation was a turning point. Lincoln went from supporting a colonization program that accompanied a plan of gradual emancipation to abandoning the policy altogether.26 At the beginning of his administration, Lincoln advocated the gradual freeing of slaves, compensating their owners, and coupling this with colonization. Following the Emancipation Proclamation and a failed experiment of Black colonization on Île à Vache, a small island near Haiti, he abandoned his support for the policy. Lincoln eventually endorsed the Thirteenth Amendment and extended the franchise to Black veterans—demonstrating that he could envision freedmen as American citizens. The fact that he spent only $38,000 of Congress’s $600,000 also shows that the colonization policy dropped from his favor.

林肯在 1862 年 8 月发表的言论(来源 3.4)先于《解放奴隶宣言》,毫无疑问,历史学家将继续争论其意图和意义。然而,他们确实重申了先前文件中存在的重要思想,包括认为条件对人类发展很重要(在他使用“系统性压迫”一词时)。林肯还比他在斯普林菲尔德的含糊其辞(即黑人“也许”在智力上与他相当)走得更远,并使用了“聪明的有色人种”一词。即便如此,这个讲话还是让许多黑人感到愤怒,不仅因为他们认为否认自己和白人一样是美国人,而且因为他们认为黑人是内战的原因的声明(此处未包括)战争。27

Lincoln’s words of August 1862 (Source 3.4) preceded the Emancipation Proclamation, and historians will, no doubt, continue to argue their intent and meaning. However, they do reiterate important ideas present in the previous documents, including a belief that conditions matter to human development (in his use of the term “systematically oppressed”). Lincoln also goes further than his equivocation at Springfield (that Blacks may “perhaps” be his intellectual equal) and uses the phrase “intelligent colored men.” Even so, the address made many Blacks angry, not only for what they saw as a denial that they were as American as the White man, but also for statements (not included here) they understood to mean that Blacks were the cause of the Civil War.27

关于殖民化这一与奴隶制和废除奴隶制密切相关的观念和立场在内战前的 25 年里发生了变化,就像有关奴隶制的政治运动发生了变化一样。虽然林肯的立场在前几十年可能是进步的,但与 1830 年代后激进的废奴主义立场相比,它是保守的。

Perspectives and stances regarding colonization, an idea intimately linked to slavery and abolition, changed in the 25 years leading up to the Civil War, just as political movements regarding the institution of slavery had. While Lincoln’s stance may have been progressive in earlier decades, it was conservative when compared with the post-1830s radical abolitionist stance.

“我们来统治,黑人来服务。” 初读时,来自宾夕法尼亚州北部的白人作家约翰·贝尔·罗宾逊 (John Bell Robinson) 在 1863 年发表的文字(来源 3.5)似乎与本次调查无关。毕竟,他们既没有提到林肯,也没有提到他的政策。然而,罗宾逊提供了一个镜头来了解当时许多白人的想法、阅读和出版内容,实际上为读者提供了林肯自己观点的背景。

“Us to Rule, and the Negroes to Serve.” On first reading, the 1863 words of John Bell Robinson (Source 3.5), a White author from the northern state of Pennsylvania, may seem irrelevant to this investigation; after all, they mention neither Lincoln nor his policies. However, Robinson provides a lens into what many Whites were thinking, reading, and publishing at the time, in effect providing the reader with a context for Lincoln’s own views.

在这份文件中,我们看到了一种如此普遍的种族化意识形态,它被认为既不令人震惊也不疯狂。约翰·贝尔·罗宾逊声称,“黑人奴隶制的好处”超越了自由劳动,相当于一项神圣的义务。他写到上帝对白人“统治,黑人服务”的计划,并警告说,篡改这些“神圣的安排”即使不是世俗的征服,也会导致永恒的堕落。罗宾逊还提到了殖民化,声称任何尝试都会失败,因为黑人“将在不到五十年的时间里重新陷入异教和野蛮之中”。

In this document we see a racialized ideology that was so common it was considered neither shocking nor lunatic. John Bell Robinson claimed that the “advantages of Negro slavery” went beyond free labor and amounted to a sacred obligation. He wrote of God’s plan for White people “to rule, and the Negroes to serve,” warning that tampering with these “holy arrangements” would result in eternal degradation, if not worldly subjugation. Robinson also mentioned colonization, asserting that any attempt would fail, as Negroes “would fall back into heathenism and barbarism in less than fifty years.”

这位北方人的言论与林肯的言论形成了鲜明的对比,他声称黑人本质上是低等的,不具备自我统治的能力。它们为理解林肯生活和讲话的世界提供了必要的背景。

This Northerner’s words provide a sharp contrast to Lincoln’s, by asserting that Blacks were inherently inferior and not equipped to rule themselves. They offer a necessary context for understanding the world in which Lincoln lived and spoke.

证实消息来源。虽然资料来源 3.13.4是历史学家关于林肯观点的持续对话中的固定内容,但其他文件和事件也反复出现。例如,林肯 1862 年 8 月写给《纽约论坛报》编辑霍勒斯·格里利的信经常被用来表明林肯只关心国家的统一,而不关心废除奴隶制。林肯写道:

Corroborating Sources. While Sources 3.1 to 3.4 are fixtures in historians’ ongoing conversations about Lincoln’s views, other documents and events appear repeatedly. For example, Lincoln’s August 1862 letter to New York Tribune editor Horace Greeley is frequently used to show that Lincoln was concerned only with the nation’s unity, not with abolishing slavery. Lincoln wrote:

我在这场斗争中的首要目标是拯救联邦,而不是拯救或摧毁奴隶制。如果我能在不解放任何奴隶的情况下拯救联邦,我会这么做;如果我能通过解放所有奴隶来拯救联邦,我会这么做;如果我能通过解放一些奴隶而让其他奴隶不受干扰来拯救联邦,我也会这么做。

My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save the Union by freeing all the slaves I would do that and if I could do it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.

通常引用就到此结束。但要理解林肯的情感,明智的做法是阅读他接下来说的话:“我在这里根据我对公务的看法阐述了我的目的;我不打算改变我经常表达的个人愿望,即世界各地的所有人都可以获得自由” 28 [强调原文]。

Often the quote ends there. But to understand Lincoln’s sentiments, it is wise to read what he goes on to say: “I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft expressed personal wish that all men everywhere could be free”28 [emphases in original].

在对林肯观点的讨论中也反复出现了两个事件:1861 年 8 月 30 日弗里蒙特将军宣布解放密苏里州的奴隶,以及大卫·亨特将军 1862 年解放南卡罗来纳州、佐治亚州和佛罗里达州奴隶的命令。一些人认为,当林肯推翻弗里蒙特的命令时,他表明他无意释放奴隶。其他人则认为,这更多的是关于政治家和律师林肯:弗里蒙特没有宪法权力来发布这样的命令,而林肯甚至不认为自己的权力可以延伸到那么远。这里重要的是他尊重自己作为法律执行者的地位,而不是作为法律制定者的地位。此外,鉴于首席大法官坦尼的最高法院——一个对支持奴隶制和反黑人意识形态都表现出友好态度的法院——林肯对可能涉及他们的任何举动都保持警惕。

Two events also appear repeatedly in a discussion of Lincoln’s views: General Fremont’s August 30, 1861, proclamation freeing the slaves in Missouri, and General David Hunter’s 1862 order to emancipate slaves in South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida. Some argue that when Lincoln overrode Fremont’s orders, he signaled a lack of intent to free the slaves. Others argue that this was more about Lincoln the politician and lawyer: Fremont didn’t have the constitutional power to issue such an order and Lincoln did not see even his own power as extending that far. What mattered here was his respect for his position as executor of the laws, not as writer of the same. Additionally, given Chief Justice Taney’s Supreme Court—a court that had shown itself friendly to both pro-slavery and anti-Black ideology—Lincoln was wary of any moves that might involve them.

将林肯置于情境中并不能提供完美的答案。历史探究教会我们容忍复杂性,而不是回避它。我们可以肯定地说的一件事是,林肯的想法比任何简单的标签都要复杂。历史学家詹姆斯·莱克谈到了林肯思想中的差异和矛盾——其他历史学家会强调林肯散文中的细微差别和区别。29一个绝对的标签,无论是种族主义还是平等主义,都无法抓住历史证据。

Contextualizing Lincoln doesn’t provide pat answers. Historical inquiry teaches us to tolerate complexity, not shy away from it. One thing we can say for sure is that Lincoln’s ideas are more complex than any simple label. Historian James Leiker talks about the discrepancies and contradictions in Lincoln’s thought—other historians would emphasize the nuances and distinctions in Lincoln’s prose.29 An absolute label, racist or egalitarian, doesn’t begin to capture the historical evidence.

将林肯视为存在于种族主义和平等主义这两个绝对之间的连续统一体更具启发性。我们可以断言,与他的白人同辈相比,林肯在他的时代并不是种族主义者,或者肯定比其他人更少。我们还可以断言,就像南北战争前美国的大多数(如果不是全部)白人一样,林肯实际上是一个种族主义者。

It’s more instructive to think about Lincoln as existing along a continuum between these two absolutes of racist and egalitarian. We could assert that compared to his White peers, Lincoln was not racist for his time, or certainly less so than others. We could also assert that like most if not all Whites in antebellum America, Lincoln was in fact a racist.

这引出了我们问题的第二个答案。林肯统治下的美国是一个极其种族主义的地方。讨论废奴运动和奴隶制问题上的地区分裂可能会让我们产生一种错误的感觉,即种族主义仅限于特定地区和人口。但从历史角度阅读这些文件揭示了一个黑人被剥夺人性的世界,人们用今天令我们厌恶的理论为奴隶制的野蛮行径辩护。林肯是种族主义者吗?这取决于。他的时间到了吗?是的,比我们想象的还要多。

Which leads us to the second answer to our question. Lincoln’s America was an incredibly racist place. Discussing the abolitionist movement and regional splits over slavery can lull us into a false sense that racism was confined to a particular region and population. But reading these documents historically reveals a world in which Blacks were denied their humanity, and people justified the barbarism of slavery with theories that repel us today. Was Lincoln a racist? It depends. Was his time? Yes, more than we would like to think possible.

为什么要教授林肯和种族?

Why Teach About Lincoln and Race?

了解背景很重要。我们情不自禁地评判过去。每个历史老师都有一个学生冲进来分享这个启示:“杰斐逊拥有奴隶!哥伦布砍掉了当地人的耳朵!” 这些学生渴望分享这些信息,证明他们过去的老师不仅遗漏了部分故事,还粉饰了这些人物,把无赖变成了英雄。但我们应该如何评价过去及其参与者呢?按照我们当代的标准还是按照他们那个时代的标准?虽然没有一种方法可以回答这个问题,但历史要求我们了解两者之间的区别。

Learning That Context Matters. We can’t help judging the past. Every history teacher has had the student who rushes in to share the revelation, “Jefferson owned slaves! Columbus cut off the ears of natives!” Such students are eager to share this information that proves that their past teachers not only left out part of the story, they whitewashed these figures and turned knaves into heroes. But how should we judge the past and its actors? By our contemporary standards or by the standards of their day? While there is not one way to answer this question, history demands that we know the difference between the two.

林肯的世界是什么样的?与我们自己的非常不同,如此不同,如果我们采取比尔和泰德风格的“精彩冒险”,我们可能会觉得自己像外星人。亚伯拉罕·林肯就是在这个陌生的世界里生活、讲话和领导的。如果我们要从历史的角度思考林肯的话,我们就必须抵制简单的判断,并就历史背景提出问题。这些话的背景和目的是什么?他的言论和思想与同时代的人相比如何?30

What was Lincoln’s world like? Very different from our own, so different that we might feel like aliens if we were to take an “excellent adventure” Bill-&-Ted style. It was in this foreign world that Abraham Lincoln lived, spoke, and led. If we are to think historically about Lincoln’s words, we must resist easy judgments and ask questions about historical context. What were the setting and purpose of these words? And how do his words and ideas compare to those of his contemporaries?30

对于历史学家来说,背景是历史推理的中心。让学生了解林肯关于种族的观点和言论,为他们提供了学习“情境化”的绝佳机会。

For historians, context lies at the epicenter of historical reasoning. Engaging students in Lincoln’s views and words on race presents them with powerful opportunities to learn what “contextualizing” is all about.

分析有关种族的想法。种族是我们课堂上经常被掩盖或忽略的话题。不可否认,种族对于理解美国的过去至关重要——以种族名义犯下的罪行、为这些罪行辩护的意识形态、具体化这些意识形态的机构——这样的例子不胜枚举。种族主义影响了我们国家的发展方式以及我们的身份。这些文件让学生专门思考种族化的想法并对其进行及时分析。

Analyzing Ideas About Race. Race is a topic too often glossed over or omitted in our classrooms. There is no denying that race matters to understanding the American past—the crimes that have been done in its name, the ideologies that justified those crimes, the institutions that reified those ideologies—the list goes on. Racism has influenced how our country has developed and who we have become. These documents engage students in thinking specifically about racialized ideas and prompt analysis of them.

了解到那些听起来冒犯我们耳朵的言论在另一个时代可能会被认为是进步的,这为我们的学生打开了一个重要的教训:不要太快地认为你赋予某句话的含义与说话者的意图相同。一些学生不愿意承认种族对美国研究很重要。其他人很快就驳回这是一个令人不快的词,因为它只是更多本土种族主义。对林肯的区别和目的的集中考虑使两个小组都可以练习分析这个不稳定且必要的主题。

Learning that statements that sound offensive to our ears could have been judged progressive in another time opens up an important lesson for our students: Don’t be too quick to assume that the meaning you ascribe to a statement is the same one the speaker intended. Some students are reluctant to acknowledge that race is important to the study of America. Others quickly dismiss an untoward word as just more home-grown racism. A focused consideration of Lincoln’s distinctions and purposes gives both groups practice in analyzing this volatile and necessary topic.

放慢学生的阅读速度。这些文件需要分析。它们要求学生慢慢阅读并注意单词的选择和细微差别。在与道格拉斯的辩论中,历史学家们在与道格拉斯的辩论中很容易忽略一个“也许”的含糊其词,这为历史学家打开了一个充满可能性的世界。林肯是一位细心的文字大师。检查他的话语为学生提供了一个机会,让他们了解资格和区别对意义的重要性。如果学生仅从表面上阅读这些文献,而不去思考谁在向谁展示什么,他们就会错过历史背景的关键方面,并且无法令人满意地回答问题。了解林肯意味着放慢脚步并询问他为什么使用一个词而不是另一个词。对文本的仔细关注对于理解历史以及我们如何了解我们对过去的了解至关重要。

Slowing Down Student Reading. These documents demand analysis. They require that students read slowly and pay attention to word choice and nuance. In a single “perhaps,” an easily missed equivocation in the debate with Douglas, historians open up a world of possibilities. Lincoln was a careful wordsmith; examining his words is an opportunity for students to see how qualification and distinctions matter to meaning. If students read these documents on a surface level, without wondering who is presenting what to whom, they will miss key aspects of historical context and won’t be able to answer the question satisfactorily. Understanding Lincoln means slowing down and asking why he used one word and not another. This careful attention to text is central to understanding history and how we know what we know about the past.

挑战学生的误解。当学生们思考说出这些话的世界时,关于过去的错误观念就会受到挑战。尽管伊利诺伊州是一个北方自由州,但种族优越感在皮奥里亚仍然发挥得非常明显。学生们了解到,种族偏见不仅限于南方,而且存在于整个内战前的美国。

Challenging Student Misconceptions. As students consider the world in which these words were uttered, flawed ideas about the past are challenged. Although Illinois was a Northern free state, racial superiority still played very well in Peoria. Students learn that racial prejudice was not limited to the South, but existed throughout antebellum America.

关于文件证据的误导性想法也将受到挑战。约翰·贝尔·罗宾逊的文件(来源 3.5)没有提及林肯。学生们经常推断这使得与林肯观点的问题无关。31但罗宾逊为了解当时人们的思考、阅读和出版内容提供了一个重要的视角。通过研究罗宾逊的话,学生将能够更好地在 1850 年代和 1860 年代的一系列观点中定位林肯。

Misleading ideas about documentary evidence will also be challenged. John Bell Robinson’s document (Source 3.5) makes no mention of Lincoln. Students often infer that this makes it irrelevant to questions about Lincoln’s views.31 But Robinson provides a vital lens for what people of this time were thinking, reading, and publishing. By examining Robinson’s words, students will be better able to locate Lincoln on a spectrum of opinion in the 1850s and 1860s.

您将如何使用这些材料?

How Might You Use These Materials?

场景 1(2-3 小时课程)。林肯是种族主义者吗?让学生参与“结构化学术争议”,他们分析文档以回答焦点问题并得出有根据的结论。32

Scenario 1 (2–3 Hour Lesson). Was Lincoln a racist? Engage students in a “Structured Academic Controversy” where they analyze documents in order to answer the focus question and craft a warranted conclusion.32


CCSS

#1、#10

CCSS

#1, #10


以 1858 年斯普林菲尔德的林肯的话开始课程(来源 3.2),但省略任何识别信息(说话者、年份、地点)。询问学生他们会如何描述这篇文章以及他们还想了解哪些内容。对于任何演讲者、时间和地点,他们会以同样的方式描述它吗?然后与他们分享识别信息。当他们发现这是林肯的话时,他们会感到惊讶吗?

Open the lesson with Lincoln’s words from Springfield in 1858 (Source 3.2), but omit any identifying information (speaker, year, place). Ask students how they would describe the passage and what else they want to know about it. Would they describe it the same way given any speaker, time, and place? Then share with them the identifying information. Are they surprised to find out that these are Lincoln’s words?

告诉学生他们将调查这个问题:林肯是种族主义者吗?检查活动的结构(工具 3.1)。将学生分成四人一组,每组分配一对 A 面(是的,林肯是种族主义者),另一对 B 面(不,林肯不是种族主义者)。分发文件包(来源 3.13.5)以及文件分析图表(工具 3.2))。学生两人一组仔细阅读文件,寻找并记录其指定职位的证据。他们还应该记录在此过程中出现的任何问题。在两人收集了支持其立场的证据后,他们将四人一组聚集在一起。第一对分享他们的立场和支持证据,而另一对则倾听以重申该立场。然后角色互换。提醒学生,在这个听力和重述活动中,学生不是辩论。此后,学生放弃分配的位置并讨论问题的最佳答案,即最能得到学生在活动中带来的证据和其他背景知识支持的答案。

Tell students that they will be investigating the question, Was Lincoln a racist? Review the structure of the activity (Tool 3.1). Organize students into groups of four and assign one pair in each group Side A (Yes, Lincoln was a racist) and the other pair Side B (No, Lincoln was not a racist). Pass out document packets (Sources 3.13.5) with the document analysis chart (Tool 3.2). In pairs, students work through the documents, finding and recording evidence for their assigned position. They should also record any questions that arise during this process. After pairs have gathered evidence for their position, they will convene in groups of four. The first pair shares their position and the supporting evidence while the other pair listens in order to restate that position. Then reverse the roles. Remind students that in this listening and restating activity, students are not debating. After this, students give up their assigned positions and discuss the best answer to the question, that is, the one that is best supported by the evidence and other background knowledge students bring to the activity.

图像

最后,要求学生写下问题的独立答案,并使用书面证据来支持他们的答案。

Finally, ask students to write independent answers to the question, using documentary evidence to support their answers.


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 基于证据的思考和论证
  • Evidence-based thinking and argumentation
  • 质疑消息来源
  • Questioning sources
  • 情境化来源
  • Contextualizing sources
  • 综合多个账户
  • Synthesizing multiple accounts
  • 仔细听
  • Listening carefully

场景 2(2-4 小时课程)。通过添加以下问题来扩展场景 1:我们应该如何判断过去?

Scenario 2 (2–4 Hour Lesson). Extend Scenario 1 by including the question, How should we judge the past?


CCSS

#1

CCSS

#1


将第二个焦点问题纳入课程中,并让学生在解决有关林肯和种族的问题后考虑它。他们可以写一个单独的段落来明确解决这个问题,或者将其包含在对第一个问题的书面分析中。

Include this second focal question in the lesson and have students consider it after they have addressed the question about Lincoln and race. They can write a separate paragraph explicitly addressing this question or include it in their written analysis of the first.

图像


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 基于证据的思考和论证
  • Evidence-based thinking and argumentation
  • 质疑消息来源
  • Questioning sources
  • 情境化来源
  • Contextualizing sources
  • 综合多个账户
  • Synthesizing multiple accounts
  • 仔细听
  • Listening carefully

场景 3(1 小时课程)。阅读上下文:看到它,做它,知道它。使用建模和指导实践来教学生如何将历史来源置于情境中。

Scenario 3 (1 Hour Lesson). Reading for context: see it, do it, know it. Use modeling and guided practice to teach students how to contextualize historical sources.


CCSS

6–8 #6

11–12 #1

CCSS

6–8 #6

11–12 #1


引入林肯是否是种族主义者的问题,并解释道:“你将试图回答这个问题,但要做到这一点,你必须仔细阅读历史证据。” 确保每个学生都有源 3.2的副本,然后模拟历史学家如何阅读和处理此文档。首先大声朗读源信息和标题,停下来提出问题和评论。然后大声朗读文档的内容,再次停下来解析一个短语、质疑一个术语或大声地思考。这种模型的要点是“大声思考”,让学生看到历史学家在阅读时所做的积极提问和思考。33

Introduce the question of whether Lincoln was a racist with the explanation, “You will be trying to answer this question, but to do so you must carefully read the historical evidence.” Make sure every student has a copy of Source 3.2, then model how a historian would read and approach this document. First read aloud the source information and head note, pausing to generate questions and comments. Then read the contents of the document aloud, again pausing to parse a phrase, question a term, or wonder aloud. The point of this modeling is to “think aloud,” and make visible for students the active questioning and thinking that historians do as they read.33

阅读完该文档后,确定您提出了哪些问题来建立历史背景。其中包括:他在和谁说话?他发表这次演讲的目的是什么?当时还发生了什么?1858 年伊利诺伊州现有的种族态度和法律是什么?这些因素如何影响林肯的用词选择和信息?阅读本章的史学文章将帮助你回答这些问题。但是,也请包括您没有答案的问题;这些可以用来向学生表明,仔细阅读历史文献意味着明确你的无知并确定你需要知道什么才能理解它。

After you work through the document, identify what questions you asked to establish the historical context. These will include: Who was he talking to? What were his purposes in making this speech? What else was happening at the time? What were existing racial attitudes and laws in Illinois in 1858? How might these factors have shaped Lincoln’s word choice and message? Reading this chapter’s historiographical essay will help you answer these questions. However, also include questions you don’t have answers for; these may be used to show students that closely reading a historical document means specifying your ignorance and identifying what you need to know to understand it.

将历史背景定义为“想象背景”,并向学生展示一些将文档置于背景中的入门问题(工具 3.3)。为了结合上下文,提出以下几点:

Define historical context as “imagining the setting,” and show students some beginning questions to contextualize documents (Tool 3.3). Make the points that in order to contextualize:

  1. 历史学家利用他们对时间和地点的了解来帮助他们理解这份文献;
  2. Historians use what they know about the time and place to help them understand the document;
  3. 历史学家询问他们不知道的内容以及他们还需要知道的内容,以尝试更全面地理解这份文件。
  4. Historians ask questions about what they don’t know and what else they need to know, to try to more fully understand the document.

在您的指导下,学生可以使用您建模的阅读练习来帮助他们理解和分析源代码 3.3。您可以通过提出诸如“阅读历史文献时我们应该首先做什么?”之类的问题来引导他们完成这个过程。并提示他们在文档的关键位置使用情境化问题。经过指导练习后,学生可以作为作业独立阅读和分析源码 3.5 。

With your guidance, students can use the reading practices you modeled to help them to understand and analyze Source 3.3. You can walk them through this process by asking questions such as “What should we do first when reading a historical document?” and prompting them to use contextualizing questions at key places in the document. After this guided practice, students can read and analyze Source 3.5 independently as homework.

图像


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 情境化来源
  • Contextualizing sources
  • 了解情境化及其必要性
  • Understanding contextualization and why it’s necessary

来源和工具

Sources and Tools

资料来源3.1 :道格拉斯演讲修改

SOURCE 3.1: DOUGLAS’S SPEECH (MODIFIED)


注:1858 年,亚伯拉罕·林肯 (Abraham Lincoln) 与斯蒂芬·A·道格拉斯 (Stephen A. Douglas) 竞选美国参议院席位。两人进行了一系列引起全国关注的七场公开辩论。以下是道格拉斯于 1858 年 8 月 21 日在伊利诺伊州渥太华举行的第一次辩论中向林肯发表的讲话的摘录。

Note: In 1858 Abraham Lincoln ran against Stephen A. Douglas for a seat in the U.S. Senate. The two engaged in a series of seven public debates that attracted national attention. The following is an excerpt from Douglas’s address to Lincoln in their first debate at Ottawa, Illinois, on August 21, 1858.

如果您希望黑人公民身份,如果您希望允许他们进入该州并与白人定居,如果您希望他们投票决定与你们平等,并使他们有资格担任公职,担任陪审团成员并且来判断你的权利,然后支持林肯先生和支持黑人公民权的黑人共和党。首先,我反对任何形式的黑人公民身份。我相信这个政府是……由白人创建的,为了白人及其后代的永远利益,我赞成将公民身份限制在白人、欧洲出生和血统的人身上,而不是将其授予黑人、印第安人和黑人。其他劣等种族。

If you desire Negro citizenship, if you desire to allow them to come into the State and settle with the White man, if you desire them to vote on an equality with yourselves, and to make them eligible to office, to serve on juries, and to judge your rights, then support Mr. Lincoln and the Black Republican party, who are in favor of the citizenship of the Negro. For one, I am opposed to Negro citizenship in any and every form. I believe this government was made … by White men, for the benefit of White men and their posterity forever, and I am in favor of confining citizenship to White men, men of European birth and descent, instead of conferring it upon Negroes, Indians and other inferior races.

林肯先生以所有在学校和教堂的地下室里到处演讲的小废奴演说家为榜样和领导,宣读了《独立宣言》,人人生而平等,然后问你怎么剥夺上帝和《独立宣言》赋予他的平等黑人。他和他们坚持认为黑人平等是由上帝的法律保证的,并且在《独立宣言》中得到了断言……。我不质疑林肯先生的良心信念,即黑人与他平等,因此是他的兄弟,但就我而言,我不认为黑人与我平等,并积极否认他是我的兄弟……。

Mr. Lincoln, following the example and lead of all the little abolition orators, who go around and lecture in the basements of schools and churches, reads from the Declaration of Independence, that all men were created equal, and then asks how can you deprive a Negro of that equality which God and the Declaration of Independence awards to him. He and they maintain that Negro equality is guaranteed by the laws of God, and that it is asserted in the Declaration of Independence…. I do not question Mr. Lincoln’s conscientious belief that the Negro was made his equal, and hence is his brother, but for my own part, I do not regard the Negro as my equal, and positively deny that he is my brother….

[林肯]认为黑人生来与他平等,与你平等,全能的上帝赋予他平等的权利,任何人类法律都不能剥夺他的这些权利……。现在,我不相信全能的上帝曾想让黑人与白人平等……。几千年来,黑人一直是地球上的一个种族,在这段时间里,在所有的纬度和气候中,无论他漂泊或被带到哪里,他都比他在那里遇到的种族低等。他属于劣等种族,必然永远处于劣等地位。

[Lincoln] holds that the Negro was born his equal and yours, and that he was endowed with equality by the Almighty, and that no human law can deprive him of these rights…. Now, I do not believe that the Almighty ever intended the Negro to be the equal of the White man…. For thousands of years the Negro has been a race upon the earth, and during all that time, in all latitudes and climates, wherever he has wandered or been taken, he has been inferior to the race which he has there met. He belongs to an inferior race, and must always occupy an inferior position.


资料来源:摘自道格拉斯于 1858 年 8 月 21 日在伊利诺伊州渥太华举行的第一次辩论中对林肯的讲话。引自 DE Fehrenbacher 编辑,亚伯拉罕·林肯,演讲与著作,1832-1858 年纽约:美国图书馆,1989 年) ,504–505。

Source: Excerpt from Douglas’s address to Lincoln in their first debate at Ottawa, Illinois, August 21, 1858. Cited in D. E. Fehrenbacher, ed., Abraham Lincoln, Speeches and Writings, 1832–1858 (New York: Library of America, 1989), 504–505.


字库

WORD BANK


有资格——有资格,适合被选择

eligible—qualified, fit to be chosen

后代——子孙、子孙后代

posterity—descendents, future generations

演说家——演讲者

orators—speechmakers

剥夺——否认、抢劫

deprive—deny, rob

断言——陈述

asserted—stated

尽责——细心、有道德

conscientious—careful, moral

赋予——提供的,有天赋的

endowed—provided, gifted


资料来源3.2:林肯道格拉斯回应(修改

SOURCE 3.2: LINCOLN’S RESPONSE TO DOUGLAS (MODIFIED)


注意:阅读林肯在伊利诺伊州渥太华辩论中对道格拉斯的答复中如何仔细比较黑人和白人。

Note: Read how Lincoln carefully compares Blacks and Whites in his reply to Douglas at the Ottawa, Illinois, debate.

我要在这里说……我无意直接或间接干涉奴隶制存在的州的制度。我认为我没有合法权利这样做,而且我也无意这样做。我无意在白人和黑人之间引入政治和社会平等。两者之间存在身体差异,根据我的判断,这可能永远禁止他们在完全平等的基础上生活在一起,并且由于必须存在差异,所以我和道格拉斯法官都认为,支持我所属的种族,拥有优越的地位。我从未说过任何相反的话,但我认为,尽管如此,世界上没有理由不让黑人享有《独立宣言》所列举的一切自然权利,即生命权、自由权和追求幸福的权利。我认为他和白人一样有权获得这些。我同意道格拉斯法官的观点,[黑人]在很多方面都无法与我平等——当然不是在肤色上,也许不是在道德或智力天赋上。但在吃自己亲手挣来的面包的权利方面,他与我平等,与道格拉斯法官平等,与每个活着的人平等。

I will say here … that I have no purpose directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so. I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and black races. There is a physical difference between the two, which in my judgment will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality, and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong, having the superior position. I have never said anything to the contrary, but I hold that notwithstanding all this, there is no reason in the world why the Negro is not entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I hold that he is as much entitled to these as the White man. I agree with Judge Douglas [that the Negro] is not my equal in many respects—certainly not in color, perhaps not in moral or intellectual endowment. But in the right to eat the bread … which his own hand earns, he is my equal and the equal of Judge Douglas, and the equal of every living man.


资料来源:摘自亚伯拉罕·林肯 1858 年 8 月 21 日在伊利诺伊州渥太华对史蒂芬·A·道格拉斯的答复。引自 DE Fehrenbacher 编辑,亚伯拉罕·林肯,演讲与著作,1832-1858 年纽约:美国图书馆,1989 年) ,512。

Source: Excerpt from Abraham Lincoln’s reply to Stephen A. Douglas at Ottawa, Illinois, August 21, 1858. Cited in D. E. Fehrenbacher, ed., Abraham Lincoln, Speeches and Writings, 1832–1858 (New York: Library of America, 1989), 512.


字库

WORD BANK


倾向——偏好、倾向

inclination—preference, tendency

相反——不同

to the contrary—different

有权——到期的、允许的

entitled—due, permitted

列举——列出

enumerated—listed

捐赠——礼物

endowment—gifts


资料来源3.3:玛丽·斯皮德修改后

SOURCE 3.3: LETTER TO MARY SPEED (MODIFIED)


注意:阅读林肯对他的私人朋友说的关于在河船上看到奴隶的话。

Note: Read Lincoln’s words to his personal friend about seeing slaves on a riverboat.

顺便说一句,船上展示了一个很好的例子,用于思考条件对人类幸福的影响。一位绅士在肯塔基州的不同地区购买了十二名黑人,并将他们带到南方的一个农场。他们六六个被锁在一起。每个人的左手腕上都戴着一个小铁U形夹……这样黑人就被串在一起,就像一条小绳上的许多鱼一样。在这种情况下,他们永远与童年的场景、他们的朋友、他们的父母、兄弟姐妹以及他们中的许多人与他们的妻子和孩子分离,并进入永久的分离状态奴隶制……然而,在所有这些令人痛苦的情况下……他们是船上最快乐、显然最快乐的生物。有一个人,他被卖掉的罪魁祸首是对妻子的过分喜爱,他几乎不停地拉小提琴;其他人则日复一日地跳舞、唱歌、讲笑话、玩各种纸牌游戏。确实如此……[上帝]使人类最糟糕的状况变得可以忍受。

By the way, a fine example was presented on board the boat for contemplating the effect of condition upon human happiness. A gentleman had purchased twelve Negroes in different parts of Kentucky and was taking them to a farm in the South. They were chained six and six together. A small iron clevis was around the left wrist of each … so that the Negroes were strung together precisely like so many fish upon a trotline. In this condition they were being separated forever from the scenes of their childhood, their friends, their fathers and mothers, and brothers and sisters, and many of them, from their wives and children, and going into perpetual slavery … yet amid all these distressing circumstances … they were the most cheerful and apparently happy creatures on board. One, whose offense for which he had been sold was over-fondness for his wife, played the fiddle almost continually; and the others danced, sung, cracked jokes, and played various games with cards from day to day. How true it is that … [God] renders the worst of human conditions tolerable.


资料来源:摘自亚伯拉罕·林肯 1841 年 9 月 27 日写给私人朋友玛丽·斯皮德的信,引自《亚伯拉罕·林肯文集》(第 1 卷)。(安娜堡:密歇根大学数字图书馆制作服务,2001 年),260。可参见http://quod.lib.umich.edu/l/lincoln/

Source: Excerpt from Abraham Lincoln’s letter to Mary Speed, a personal friend, September 27, 1841, cited in Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln (Vol. 1). (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Digital Library Production Services, 2001), 260. Available at http://quod.lib.umich.edu/l/lincoln/


字库

WORD BANK


考虑——考虑、反思

contemplating—considering, reflecting on

perpetual——持久的,永久的

perpetual—lasting, permanent


资料来源3.4:关于殖民化的讲话

SOURCE 3.4: ADDRESS ON COLONIZATION


注:对获得自由的黑人进行殖民化的想法自 1700 年代以来就一直存在。许多反对奴隶制的白人积极支持殖民化,认为只有重新安置黑人人口才能实现真正的自由和平等。亚伯拉罕·林肯 (Abraham Lincoln) 长期以来一直支持这个想法,并于 1862 年国会拨出一笔资金用于殖民计划。以下内容摘自林肯 1862 年 8 月 14 日在白宫向一群自由黑人发表的《殖民演讲》。

Note: Colonization of freed Blacks was an idea that had been around since the 1700s. Many Whites who opposed slavery actively supported colonization, maintaining that true freedom and equality could be realized only by relocating the Black population. Abraham Lincoln long favored the idea, and in 1862 Congress allocated a sum of money for a colonization program. The following is from Lincoln’s “Address on Colonization,” delivered to a group of free Black men at the White House on August 14, 1862.

为什么……你们种族的人民应该被殖民,在哪里?……如果我们面对的是那些一开始就不自由、智力被奴隶制蒙蔽的人,我们的起始材料就非常贫乏。如果聪明的有色人种……愿意在这件事上采取行动,可能会取得很大的成就。极其重要的是,我们一开始就拥有能够像白人一样思考的人,而不是那些受到系统性压迫的人……。我正在考虑建立殖民地的地方是在中美洲……。这个国家对于任何人来说都是一个非常优秀的国家,拥有丰富的自然资源和优势,特别是因为气候与你的祖国相似,因此适合你的身体状况。

Why … should the people of your race be colonized, and where? … If we deal with those who are not free at the beginning, and whose intellects are clouded by Slavery, we have very poor materials to start with. If intelligent colored men … would move in this matter, much might be accomplished. It is exceedingly important that we have men at the beginning capable of thinking as White men, and not those who have been systematically oppressed…. The place I am thinking about having for a colony is in Central America…. The country is a very excellent one for any people, and with great natural resources and advantages, and especially because of the similarity of climate with your native land—thus being suited to your physical condition.


资料来源:林肯于 1862 年 8 月 14 日在白宫向一群自由黑人发表的《关于殖民的演说》,引自《亚伯拉罕·林肯文集》(第 5 卷)。(安娜堡:密歇根大学数字图书馆制作服务,2001 年),371-372。可在http://quod.lib.umich.edu/l/lincoln/获取

Source: Lincoln’s “Address on Colonization” delivered to a group of free Black men at the White House on August 14, 1862, cited in Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln (Vol. 5). (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Digital Library Production Services, 2001), 371–372. Available at http://quod.lib.umich.edu/l/lincoln/


字库

WORD BANK


智力——头脑

intellects—minds

被压迫——以残酷、不公平的方式被统治

oppressed—dominated in a cruel, unfair way


资料来源3.5:约翰·贝尔·罗宾逊

SOURCE 3.5: JOHN BELL ROBINSON


注意:阅读约翰·贝尔·罗宾逊关于种族和种族关系的理论。罗宾逊是一位住在宾夕法尼亚州的白人。

Note: Read John Bell Robinson’s theories about race and race relations. Robinson was a White man who lived in Pennsylvania.

上帝自己创造他们是为了让他们成为有用的奴隶,并要求我们这样使用他们,如果我们背叛了我们的信任,并把他们抛弃在他们自己的资源上,我们就会将他们重新转变为野蛮人。我们的天父让我们来统治,让黑人来服务,如果我们……为了人类的福祉和他自己的荣耀而搁置他的神圣安排,篡改的法律,我们将被推翻并永远堕落,也许还成为其他一些文明国家的臣民…… 让所有黑人在自己的祖国殖民几乎是不切实际的,这永远不可能完成,在这片绿色的地球上没有其他地方可以为他们做事。如果把他们送到其他地方,那就是极其残忍和野蛮的行为。如果他们都被殖民到非洲海岸,那么不到五十年,他们就会重新陷入异教和野蛮状态。

God himself has made them for usefulness as slaves, and requires us to employ them as such, and if we betray our trust, and throw them off on their own resources, we reconvert them into barbarians. Our Heavenly Father has made us to rule, and the Negroes to serve, and if we … set aside his holy arrangements for the good of mankind and his own glory, and tamper with his laws, we shall be overthrown and eternally degraded, and perhaps made subjects of some other civilized nation…. Colonization in their native land of all the Negroes would be so nearly impracticable, that it will never be done, and no other spot on this green earth will do for them. It would be the height of cruelty and barbarism to send them anywhere else. If they could all be colonized on the coast of Africa, they would fall back into heathenism and barbarism in less than fifty years.


资料来源:摘自 JB Robinson,《奴隶制与反奴隶制的图片:从道德、社会和政治角度考虑的黑人奴隶制的优势和黑人自由的好处》(费城,1863 年),42。

Source: Excerpt from J. B. Robinson, Pictures of Slavery and Anti-Slavery: Advantages of Negro Slavery and the Benefits of Negro Freedom Morally, Socially, and Politically Considered (Philadelphia, 1863), 42.


字库

WORD BANK


重新转换——变回来

reconvert—to change back

tamper——干扰、混乱

tamper—interfere, mess

永远降级——永远受损,等级降低

eternally degraded—forever damaged, lowered in rank

异教徒——非基督教的事物状态,异教

heathenism—un-Christian state of things, paganism


工具3.1 :结构学术争议方向_ _

TOOL 3.1: STRUCTURED ACADEMIC CONTROVERSY DIRECTIONS


问:亚伯拉罕·林肯是种族主义者吗?

Question: Was Abraham Lincoln a Racist?

 

 

A面

Side A

B面

Side B

是的,林肯是一个种族主义者

Yes, Lincoln was a racist

不,林肯不是种族主义者

No, Lincoln was not a racist

  1. 合作伙伴准备
    1. 寻找证据来支持你的论点。工艺位置。
  2. Partners Prepare
    1. Find evidence to support your side of the argument. Craft position.
  3. 职位介绍
    1. A 方使用文本中的支持证据表达自己的立场。
    2. B 方重申,以使 A 方满意。
    3. B 方使用文本中的支持证据阐述其立场。
    4. A 方重申,令 B 方满意。
  4. Position Presentation
    1. Side A presents their position using supporting evidence from the texts.
    2. Side B restates to Side A’s satisfaction.
    3. Side B presents their position using supporting evidence from the texts.
    4. Side A restates to Side B’s satisfaction.
  5. 建立共识
    1. 放弃角色。
    2. 使用支持证据就该问题达成共识(或至少澄清你们的分歧所在)。
    3. 思考一个问题:



      我们应该如何评价过去的人?
  6. Consensus-Building
    1. Abandon roles.
    2. Build consensus regarding the question (or at least clarify where your differences lie), using supporting evidence.
    3. Consider the question:



      How should we judge people from the past?

工具3.2 SAC文件分析_

TOOL 3.2: SAC DOCUMENT ANALYSIS CHART


林肯是种族主义者吗?

Was Lincoln a Racist?

 

 

立场:是的,林肯是一个种族主义者。

Position: YES, Lincoln was a racist.

文档:

Document:

证据一:

Evidence 1:

 

 

文档:

Document:

证据2:

Evidence 2:

 

 

文档:

Document:

证据3:

Evidence 3:

 

 

文档:

Document:

证据4:

Evidence 4:

 

 

您对这些来源和想法有什么疑问?

What questions do you have about these sources and ideas?

 

 

林肯是种族主义者吗?

Was Lincoln a Racist?

立场:不,林肯不是种族主义者。

Position: NO, Lincoln was not a racist.

 

 

文档:

Document:

证据一:

Evidence 1:

 

 

文档:

Document:

证据2:

Evidence 2:

 

 

文档:

Document:

证据3:

Evidence 3:

 

 

文档:

Document:

证据4:

Evidence 4:

 

 

您对这些来源和想法有什么疑问?









What questions do you have about these sources and ideas?










共识:

CONSENSUS:

 

 

写作提示

WRITING PROMPT

林肯是种族主义者吗?

Was Lincoln a racist?

 

 

使用证据(引用、信息)来支持你的答案。如果您愿意,请包括对问题的评估。

Use evidence (quotes, information) to support your answer. Include an evaluation of the question if you wish.

 

 

工具3.3 上下文问题_

TOOL 3.3: CONTEXT QUESTIONS


  1. 该资料是何时何地编写或制作的?
  2. When and where was this source written or produced?
  3. 撰写本文时还发生了什么?
  4. What else was happening at the time this was written?
  5. 为什么会产生它?
  6. Why was it produced?
  7. 那时有什么不同?什么是相同的?
  8. What was different back then? What was the same?
  9. 在当时的人眼中,它会是什么样子?
  10. What would it look like through the eyes of someone who lived back then?

建议资源

Suggested Resources

http://lincoln.lib.niu.edu/aboutbiovideo.html

http://lincoln.lib.niu.edu/aboutbiovideo.html

该网站由亚伯拉罕·林肯历史数字化项目维护,拥有大量有关林肯在担任总统之前的生活的材料。资源包括解释性文章、课程计划、学术讲座视频、主要来源档案、地图和图像。这些可以按格式或主题浏览。

Maintained by the Abraham Lincoln Historical Digitization Project, this site has a wealth of materials focused on Lincoln’s life prior to his presidency. Resources include interpretive essays, lesson plans, videos of scholarly lectures, primary source archives, maps, and images. These can be browsed by format or theme.

http://www.gilderlehrman.org/institute/lincoln.html

http://www.gilderlehrman.org/institute/lincoln.html

这个通往林肯教学和学习资源的门户位于吉尔德·莱尔曼研究所,包括关于林肯的宝贵(且简短!)学术论文和视频讲座。特别有趣的是在线展览“林肯与解放黑奴宣言”,其中包括解释性说明以及关键文件的图像和文字记录。

This gateway to resources on teaching and learning about Lincoln, housed at the Gilder Lehrman Institute, includes invaluable (and brief!) scholarly essays on Lincoln and video lectures. Of special interest is the online exhibition “Lincoln and the Emancipation Proclamation,” which includes explanatory notes, and images and transcripts of key documents.

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/alhtml/alhome.html

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/alhtml/alhome.html

林肯先生的虚拟图书馆

Mr. Lincoln’s Virtual Library

国会图书馆收藏了大量有关林肯及其时代的手稿、乐谱和纪念品。

The Library of Congress’s large collection of manuscripts, sheet music, and memorabilia regarding Lincoln and his times.

http://www.history.umd.edu/Freedmen/index.html

http://www.history.umd.edu/Freedmen/index.html

在马里兰大学的支持下,自由民和南方社会项目利用国家档案馆的文件,通过参与者的话语生动地演绎了解放的戏剧。特别有趣的可能是详细的“内战期间解放年表”(http://www.history.umd.edu/Freedmen/chronol.htm)。

Supported by the University of Maryland, the Freedmen and Southern Society Project uses documents from the National Archives to vivify the drama of emancipation through the words of its participants. Of special interest may be the detailed “Chronology of Emancipation during the Civil War” (http://www.history.umd.edu/Freedmen/chronol.htm).

http://www.abrahamlincoln.org/

http://www.abrahamlincoln.org/

林肯研究所的主页直接链接到其六个网站,重点关注林肯生活的不同方面。解释性文章和选定的主要来源使深入探讨林肯主题变得容易。

This home page for the Lincoln Institute links directly to its six websites focused on different aspects of Lincoln’s life. Interpretive essays and selected primary sources make it easy to pursue a Lincoln topic in depth.

http://www.learner.org/workshops/primarysources/emancipation/introduction.html

http://www.learner.org/workshops/primarysources/emancipation/introduction.html

这个专业发展研讨会由 Annenberg Media 制作,探讨林肯在废除奴隶制中的作用。参与者将通过视频讲座、主要资料来源和指导性问题来思考林肯对非裔美国人和奴隶制的看法。

Produced by Annenberg Media, this professional development workshop explores Lincoln’s role in the ending of slavery. Participants are prompted to consider Lincoln’s beliefs on African Americans and slavery using a video lecture, primary sources, and guiding questions.

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/l/lincoln/

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/l/lincoln/

在这里,由罗伊·P·巴斯勒 (Roy P. Basler) 领导的团队编辑的多卷本经典著作《亚伯拉罕·林肯全集》以可搜索的形式在线提供。

Here, the multivolume classic The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, edited by a team led by Roy P. Basler, is available online in searchable form.

 

 


第 4 章

CHAPTER 4


哥伦布日:1892 年,而不是1492 年

Columbus Day: 1892, Not 1492

杰克·施奈德

Jack Schneider

图像

哥伦布日纪念庆典,联合车站,华盛顿特区,1912 年。贝恩新闻服务出版。网址:http://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/ggbain.11303/

Columbus Day Memorial Celebration, Union Station, Washington, DC, 1912. Published by Bain News Service. Available at http://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/ggbain.11303/

1892 年夏天,本杰明·哈里森总统陷入了一场激烈的连任竞选之中。7 月 21 日,他发布公告,呼吁设立一个新的全国性节日:“发现日”(见来源 4.1)。发现日在学校、教堂和其他集会场所举行,将克里斯托弗·哥伦布视为“进步和启蒙”的象征。一个多世纪后,哥伦布日成为美国仅有的两个纪念个人的节日之一(另外一个是马丁·路德·金博士的生日)。

In the summer of 1892, President Benjamin Harrison was locked in a fierce campaign for reelection to a second term. On July 21, he issued a proclamation calling for a new national holiday: “Discovery Day” (see Source 4.1). To be observed in schools, churches, and other places of assembly, Discovery Day honored Christopher Columbus as a symbol of “progress and enlightenment.” Over a century later, Columbus Day is one of only two American holidays (along with the birthday of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.) that honor an individual.

虽然前几代人将哥伦布视为勇敢的探险家和勇敢的冒险家,但今天的历史学家却往往不那么慷慨。柯克帕特里克·塞尔的《克里斯托弗·哥伦布与天堂的征服》将哥伦布的遗产描述为暴力、殖民主义、贪婪和种族主义之一。霍华德·津恩(Howard Zinn)的《美国人民的历史》已售出超过一百万册,他将水手描绘成一个在印度群岛追逐黄金的偏执狂。由于没有找到他所寻求的财富,津恩的哥伦布诉诸了残暴和最终的人口贩卖,他写道:“让我们以三位一体的名义继续发送所有可以出售的奴隶。” 1

While previous generations viewed Columbus as an intrepid explorer and courageous risk-taker, today’s historians tend to be less generous. Kirkpatrick Sale’s Christopher Columbus and the Conquest of Paradise describes Columbus’s legacy as one of violence, colonialism, greed, and racism. Howard Zinn, whose A People’s History of the United States has sold well over a million copies, casts the mariner as a monomaniacal fiend driven by the pursuit of gold in the Indies. Not finding the riches he sought, Zinn’s Columbus resorted to brutality and eventual human trafficking, writing: “Let us in the name of the Holy Trinity go on sending all the slaves that can be sold.”1

唉,哥伦布最近表现不佳。就像前几代人对哥伦布航行的歌颂“蓝色的海洋”一样,历史学家对哥伦布的悲观描绘已经渗透到大众的意识中。南达科他州和加利福尼亚州伯克利市甚至在20世纪90年代废除了哥伦布日,分别将其更名为“美国原住民日”和“原住民日”。

Alas, Columbus has not fared well of late. Like the rhyme about his sailing “the ocean blue” for previous generations, historians’ bleak portrait of Columbus has penetrated popular consciousness. South Dakota and the city of Berkeley, California, even abrogated Columbus Day in the 1990s, renaming it “Native American Day” and “Indigenous People’s Day,” respectively.

考虑到哥伦布的股价不断下跌,在我们最近完成的一项研究中,高中历史学生在阅读原始的哥伦布日法令时感到愤怒也就不足为奇了。2这些学生被要求阅读一系列文件并将每个文件置于历史背景中。当他们阅读文本时,学生们谈论了他们认为这些文件的内容以及想到的任何其他关联。

Given Columbus’s falling stock, it is hardly surprising that in a recent study we completed, high school history students bristled when reading the original Columbus Day decree.2 These students were asked to read a series of documents and to place each in historical context. As they read through the texts, students talked about what they thought the documents were about and any other associations that came to mind.

当哈里森宣布“发现日”时,一些学生立即开始抨击哥伦布。雅各布是美国历史课先修课程的一名高中生,他的评论是这样开始的:

When they reached Harrison’s “Discovery Day” proclamation, some students wasted no time getting down to Columbus-bashing. Jacob, a high school student in an Advanced Placement U.S. history class, began his comments thus:

首先跳出来的是哥伦布是“进步和启蒙”的先驱,这当然是一种看待它的方式,但从我了解到的情况来看,他的目标并不完全崇高。只要发财就行,无所谓。找到一条通往印度群岛的路。证明地球不是平的。

The first thing that jumps out is that Columbus is a pioneer of “progress and enlightenment,” which was certainly one way of looking at it, but from what I’ve learned, his goals were not entirely noble. Just get rich, whatever. Find a way to the Indies. Show that the earth wasn’t flat.

此外,雅各布抱怨道,该文件“赞扬了哥伦布的虔诚信仰”。哥伦布“自称是一名真正的基督徒,但他也俘虏并折磨了印第安人,所以他可能并不像现在这样高贵。” 当被问及他是否还发生了什么事情时,雅各布回答道:“事实上,这已经成为我们应该尊敬的节日,这更糟糕!”

Further, Jacob complained, the document “praises Columbus for his devout faith.” Columbus “claimed to be a true Christian, but he also captured and tortured Indians, so he wasn’t maybe as noble as this is having him be.” Asked if anything else occurred to him, Jacob responded: “And the fact that it’s becoming a holiday that we’re supposed to revere, that’s even worse!”

雅各布的反应在这群聪明、善于表达的高中生中很常见。雅各布利用背景知识,直奔探险家,进行了一些人可能认为的“批判性思维”。毫无疑问,至关重要。

Jacob’s response was common among this group of bright, articulate high school students. Drawing on background knowledge, Jacob went right at the explorer, engaging in what some might view as “critical thinking.” Critical, without a doubt.

事实证明,哈里森总统的声明与 1492 年甚至哥伦布本人都没有什么关系。雅各布虽然能力强、善于表达,但他却错过了这份文件的真实故事。

President Harrison’s proclamation, it turns out, has little to do with 1492, or even Columbus himself. Capable and articulate as he was, Jacob had missed the document’s real story.

历史学家如何解读它?

How Did Historians Read It?

当被问及同一份文件的内容时,一群历史学博士生的看法截然不同,他们引用了以下内容:

Asked what the same document was about, a group of doctoral candidates in history saw it quite differently, citing such things as:

  • “扩大英雄万神殿,将以前的不受欢迎的人包括在内。”
  • The “expansion of the heroic pantheon to include former undesirables.”
  • “为了在城市中心获得选票而无耻地呼吁超级英雄。”
  • A “shameless appeal to superheroes in order to gain votes in urban centers.”
  • “战后美国泛白主义的开始。” 3
  • “The beginning of Pan-Whiteness in post-bellum America.”3

与高中生看到哥伦布的名字却一动不动不同,研究生们认为这份文件反映了身份政治和古老的竞选活动。事实上,历史学家几乎没有提到哥伦布。为什么两个群体在同一篇文本中看到如此不同的东西?

Unlike the high school students, who alighted on Columbus’s name and never budged, the graduate students viewed the document as a reflection of identity politics and good old electioneering. In fact, the historians hardly mentioned Columbus at all. How was it that the two groups saw such different things in the same text?

简单的答案是历史学家只是了解更多的美国历史。显然这是真的,但只是在一定程度上。这些年轻的历史学家研究了突尼斯的法国殖民主义者和阿拉伯民族主义者之间的性别关系、巴黎围城与德国统一之间的关系以及阿里死后伊斯兰教的教义分裂等话题,但对美国历史上的这一时期一无所知。这会改变他们对文本的解读。然而,他们确实拥有的是对这份文件的“历史方法”,一种对文献证据的定位,这对于那些在其中实践的人来说几乎像是常识。这种方向打开了一个对未受过教育的读者关闭的世界。

The easy answer would be to say that the historians simply know more American history. Obviously that’s true, but only to a point. Having studied such topics as gender relations among French colonialists and Arab nationalists in Tunisia, the relationship between the Siege of Paris and German unification, and doctrinal schisms in Islam after Ali’s death, the young historians possessed no factual knowledge of this time period in American history that would change their readings of the text. What they did possess, however, was a “historical approach” to the document, an orientation to documentary evidence that almost seems like common sense to those practiced in it. This orientation unlocks a world closed to untutored readers.

虽然高中生对文件中最明显的特征——克里斯托弗·哥伦布的两极分化人物和他在公众舆论场上不断变化的命运——做出了回应,但历史学家却采用了不同的方法。对他们来说,阅读历史文献意味着将消息来源放在证人席上,并要求他们说出真相或谎言。可以肯定的是,历史学家是运用证据规则和论证规则的专家。尽管如此,他们的方法并没有什么特别复杂的。事实上,他们做的一些最深层次的事情,也是最基本的。

While the high school students responded to the document’s most pronounced feature—the polarizing figure of Christopher Columbus and his changing fortunes in the court of public opinion—the historians employed a different approach. For them, reading a historical document meant putting sources on the stand and demanding that they yield their truths or falsehoods. To be sure, the historians were experts at employing disciplinary canons of evidence and rules of argument. Still, nothing about their approach was particularly complicated. In fact, some of the deepest things they did were also the most basic.

考虑一下他们的开局策略。当历史学家坐下来阅读这份文件时,他们的第一句话是这样的:“好吧,现在是 1892 年了。”

Consider their opening gambit. When historians sat down with the document, their first words were something along the lines of: “Okay, it’s 1892.”

这确实是一个简单的举动——承认哈里森宣言并不是一个从空中回响的自由浮动的话语。对于历史学家来说,这份文件是一件位于独特时间和地点的文物,是历史上独一无二的时刻。对他们来说,这个时刻不是 1492 年,甚至不是 2002 年。而是 1892 年。

A simple move, really—a recognition that the Harrison proclamation was not a free-floating utterance echoing from the ether. To the historians, the document was an artifact located in a unique time and place, a moment in history unlike any other. For them, this moment was not about 1492, or even 2002. It was about 1892.

这就立即提出了一个问题:1892 年意味着什么?

Which immediately raises the question: What does 1892 mean?

哈里森总统的背景

President Harrison in Context

对于历史学家来说,哈里森总统的公告更多的是关于 1892 年,而不是关于哥伦布。因此,他们的问题集中在 19 世纪末而不是 15 世纪。哈里森为什么要表彰哥伦布?他对这位探险家有个人感情吗?哈里森认为哥伦布是一个榜样吗?还是这个举动还有其他一些没有立即引起人们注意的东西?当然,肯定是有什么原因的。

To the historians, President Harrison’s proclamation was more about 1892 than it was about Columbus. Consequently, their questions focused on the late 19th century rather than the 15th. Why would Harrison have honored Columbus? Did he harbor some personal affinity for the explorer? Did Harrison consider Columbus a role model? Or was there something more to this move that doesn’t immediately strike the eye? Surely, there must have been some reason.

历史学家们集思广益,集思广益,讨论了他们对那个时代的历史背景所能记得的一点点(回想一下,没有人是美国历史专家)。事实上,大多数人只能记住他们在高中和本科调查课程中学到的内容。在思考 1890 年代的美国时,他们试图回忆起重大事件、主题和人物:进步时代、边境关闭、弗雷德里克·杰克逊·特纳、民粹主义、威廉·詹宁斯·布莱恩、“黄金十字”演讲——任何高中教科书中都可以找到的参考资料。但当历史学家们继续谈论这个时期时,他们不可避免地谈到了移民的话题。当他们这样做时,灯泡就亮了。

The historians brainstormed what little they could remember about the era’s historical context (recall that none was an expert in American history). Most, in fact, could remember only what they had covered in high school and undergraduate survey courses. In thinking about the United States in the 1890s, they tried to recall major events, themes, and people: the Progressive Era, the closing of the frontier, Frederick Jackson Turner, Populism, William Jennings Bryan, the “Cross of Gold” speech—the kinds of references found in any high school textbook. But as the historians continued to talk about the period, they inevitably arrived at the topic of immigration. When they did, light bulbs clicked on.

19世纪末,美国正在发生翻天覆地的变化。前所未有的移民浪潮一夜之间改变了这个国家(见来源 4.4)。1880 年至 1910 年间的 30 年里,有 1800 万新移民来到美国海岸。他们是不同品种的移民——用当时的术语来说,他们是“斯拉夫人”、“阿尔卑斯人”、“希伯来人”、“伊比利亚人”或“地中海人”。他们大部分来自欧洲,但不是大多数美国移民以前来自的欧洲。他们来自更远的东方和更远的南方。他们皮肤黝黑,说着奇怪的语言。他们的崇拜方式与大多数土著新教徒不同。4

At the end of the 19th century, the United States was getting a makeover. Unprecedented waves of immigration transformed the country overnight (see Source 4.4). In the 30 years between 1880 and 1910, 18 million newcomers came to America’s shores. And they were immigrants of a different breed—in the terminology of the time they were “Slavs,” “Alpines,” “Hebrews,” “Iberics,” or “Mediterraneans.” They were from Europe, mostly, but not the Europe most American immigrants had come from previously. They were from farther east and farther south. They were swarthy and spoke strange languages. They worshipped differently from the indigenous Protestant majority.4

这些新来者中人数最多的是天主教徒。1880年代初,美国约有30万意大利人,几乎全部是天主教徒。到 1910 年,在 9200 万美国人中,这一数字已达到 200 万。随着意大利人加入过去三十年形成的爱尔兰裔美国人社区,城市天主教徒成为一个有可能左右选举的政治集团。但尽管他们的数量庞大且不断增长,他们仍然是饱受诟病的少数群体。

The most numerous of these new arrivals were Catholics. At the beginning of the 1880s, there were about 300,000 Italians in the United States, almost all of them Catholic. By 1910 that number had reached 2 million out of a population of 92 million Americans. As the Italians joined the Irish American community that had formed during the previous three decades, urban Catholics became a political bloc with the potential to swing elections. But though their numbers were strong and growing, they remained a much-maligned minority.

整个 19 世纪,天主教徒被攻击为非美国的“天主教徒”,被指控对罗马比对美国更忠诚。内战前兴起的“一无所知”运动并向国会派遣了数十名成员,其成立很大程度上是为了“抵制罗马教会的阴险政策和所有其他外国影响”5(见资料来源4.6) 。

Throughout the 19th century, Catholics were attacked as un-American “papists,” accused of being more loyal to Rome than to the United States. The Know-Nothing movement that sprang up before the Civil War and sent dozens of its members to Congress was founded in large part in order “to resist the insidious policy of the Church of Rome and all other foreign influence”5 (see Source 4.6).

天主教徒无论走到哪里都面临着偏见和怀疑,最严重的是在学校和工作场所。天主教移民的反对者包括电报发明者塞缪尔·莫尔斯(Samuel FB Morse)和宗教领袖、哈丽特·比彻·斯托(Harriet Beecher Stowe)的父亲莱曼·比彻(Lyman Beecher)等知名人士。事实上,莫尔斯写了一篇题为《外国阴谋侵犯美国自由》的小册子,警告美国新教徒注意梵蒂冈主教及其美国代理人——爱尔兰和意大利移民策划的控制他们的阴谋。

Catholics faced prejudice and suspicion everywhere they went, most egregiously in schools and at the workplace. Opponents of Catholic immigration included well-known figures like Samuel F. B. Morse, inventor of the telegraph, and Lyman Beecher, a religious leader and father of Harriet Beecher Stowe. Morse, in fact, penned a tract titled “Foreign Conspiracy against the Liberties of the United States,” which warned Protestant Americans of a plot to control them hatched by the Vatican bishops and their American agents—Irish and Italian immigrants.

当他们的孩子在公立学校受到骚扰并接受新教倾向的课程时,天主教徒的回应是建立独立的教会学校系统。但是,尽管天主教学校没有收到公共资金,但它们仍然与公立学校有明显的不同:它们使用天主教圣经而不是英王钦定版圣经,课程通常由神职人员主持,教学经常用外语进行。移民学生的福利。结果,天主教学校被描绘成反美主义的滋生地。

When their children were harassed in the public schools and subjected to a Protestant-leaning curriculum, Catholics responded by creating separate systems of parochial schools. But even though the Catholic schools received no public money, they remained visibly different from public schools: They used a Catholic bible rather than the King James version, classes were often led by members of the clergy, and instruction was frequently in foreign languages for the benefit of the immigrant pupils. As a result, Catholic schools were portrayed as breeding grounds of anti-Americanism.

在工作场所,情况也大致相同。与许多 19 世纪的移民一样,天主教新移民往往极度贫困,并且愿意为降低工资而工作。因此,他们因降低美国出生工人的赚钱能力而受到蔑视。当城市工厂因罢工而关闭时,业主经常求助于天主教徒作为罢工破坏者,为他们提供临时就业机会,但在本地出生的人眼中进一步羞辱他们。无论他们是爱尔兰人、意大利人还是其他种族,天主教徒经常得到这样的信息:他们不属于这里。

In the workplace the story was much the same. Like many 19th-century immigrants, the Catholic newcomers were often desperately poor and willing to work for reduced wages. Consequently, they were scorned for driving down the earning power of American-born workers. When strikes shut down urban factories, owners frequently turned to Catholics as strikebreakers, providing them with temporary employment but further stigmatizing them in the eyes of the native-born. Whether they were Irish, Italian, or some other ethnic origin, Catholics often got the message that they did not belong.

毫不奇怪,天主教徒渴望提高他们的社会和经济地位,并加班加点地表达他们的爱国主义。许多天主教徒,特别是意大利人和葡萄牙人,都宣扬与新大陆的发现者、虔诚的天主教徒哥伦布的联系。康涅狄格天主教报 1878 年的一篇社论简洁地写道:没有人比这位伟大而高贵的人——虔诚、热心、忠实的天主教徒……克里斯托弗·哥伦布——更值得“怀念”。6

Not surprisingly, Catholics were eager to improve their social and economic standing, and worked overtime to express their patriotism. Many Catholics, particularly Italians and Portuguese, promoted their connection to Columbus, discoverer of the New World and a devout Catholic. An 1878 editorial in the Connecticut Catholic put it succinctly: No one was more deserving “of grateful remembrance than the great and noble man—the pious, zealous, faithful Catholic … Christopher Columbus.”6

为了提升他们的形象,美国天主教徒以哥伦布的名义设立了一个节日,以他的名字命名学校和医院,并寻求教皇正式封圣他。圣母大学在其主楼委托绘制了 12 幅壁画,以纪念“天主教徒哥伦布”。1882 年,即哈里森宣布这一宣言的 10 年前,来自康涅狄格州纽黑文的天主教徒创立了哥伦布骑士团,该骑士团最终成为美国最大的泛天主教会。天主教兄弟会组织。其成员相信,作为哥伦布的天主教后裔,他们“因我们信仰之一的这一发现而享有所有权利和特权”。7因此,尽管有着不同的民族血统和不同的习俗,天主教少数派还是利用他们与这位著名且仍然受人喜爱的探险家的联系,既作为建立泛天主教团结的一种手段,又展示了他们真正的美国人身份(见资料来源4.24.3) 。

To further their image, American Catholics created a feast day in Columbus’s honor, named schools and hospitals after him, and sought his official canonization by the Pope. The University of Notre Dame commissioned twelve murals in its Main Building honoring “Columbus the Catholic,” and in 1882, 10 years before Harrison’s proclamation, Catholics from New Haven, Connecticut, founded the Knights of Columbus, which eventually became the nation’s largest pan-Catholic fraternal organization. Its members believed that as Catholic descendants of Columbus, they were “entitled to all the rights and privileges due such a discovery by one of our faith.”7 Thus, despite disparate national origins and different customs, the Catholic minority drew on their connection to the famous and still-beloved explorer both as a means of creating pan-Catholic unity and to show how American they really were (see Sources 4.2 and 4.3).

1860 年代中期,纽约人举办了以哥伦布为主题的庆祝活动。旧金山的意大利人于 1869 年庆祝了他们的第一个发现日,费城人于 1876 年在费尔芒特公园竖立了哥伦布雕像。早在 1892 年颁布公告之前,圣路易斯、波士顿、辛辛那提和新奥尔良就已经将哥伦布的庆祝活动列入了日程表。因此,当本杰明·哈里森 (Benjamin Harrison) 宣布 1892 年 10 月 21 日为“发现日”时,他并没有创造任何新东西。相反,根据对全国各地天主教徒基层努力的认可,他批准了许多已经举行的庆祝活动。托马斯·J·施勒雷斯 (Thomas J. Schlereth) 认为,对于天主教徒来说,哥伦布已成为“前所未有的移民时代的美国民族圣人”。8

In the mid-1860s New Yorkers hosted Columbus-themed festivities. San Francisco’s Italians celebrated their first Discovery Day in 1869, and Philadelphians erected a statue of Columbus in Fairmount Park in 1876. Well before the 1892 proclamation, celebrations of Columbus were already on the calendar in St. Louis, Boston, Cincinnati, and New Orleans. And so, when Benjamin Harrison proclaimed October 21, 1892, “Discovery Day,” he wasn’t creating anything new. Rather, he was sanctioning the many celebrations already in place, according recognition to grassroots efforts by Catholics around the country. According to Thomas J. Schlereth, for Catholics, Columbus had become “an American ethnic saint in an era of unprecedented immigration.”8

该公告也有政治角度。哈里森正在为自己的政治生命而战。通过正式承认哥伦布,他试图吸引大批新选民加入。因此,“发现日”可能与其说是英雄崇拜,不如说是经过考验的真实政党政治。哈里森对哥伦布的公开认可是对一个特殊利益群体——城市天主教徒——的精明的政治诉求,他相信这些人有能力使选举对他有利。

The proclamation had a political angle, too. Harrison was engaged in a battle for his political life. By formally recognizing Columbus, he sought to bring legions of new voters into the fold. Thus, “Discovery Day” may have been less about hero worship than tried and true party politics. Harrison’s public recognition of Columbus was an astute political appeal to a special-interest group—urban Catholics—whom he believed had the power to swing the election in his favor.

这次选举充满了许多奇怪的曲折,现任哈里森与前总统格罗弗·克利夫兰对决。克利夫兰成为自内战以来第一位当选总统的民主党人,尽管在 1888 年以微弱优势赢得普选,但他在连任竞选中输给了哈里森。四年后,同样的两个对手陷入了连任之战。现任总统和前任领导人都不是最受欢迎的人。

It was an election with many strange twists, pitting the incumbent Harrison against Grover Cleveland, himself a former president. After becoming the first Democrat elected to the office since the Civil War, Cleveland lost his 1888 reelection bid to Harrison, despite narrowly winning the popular vote. Four years later, the same two opponents were locked in a battle for reelection. Neither the sitting president nor the former leader was a runaway favorite.

由于克利夫兰的人气回升以及第三方候选人詹姆斯·B·韦弗的支持,哈里森在传统的共和党中西部面临着一场艰苦的战斗。为了确保这些州以及东部城市的安全,哈里森和他的共和党盟友决定全力以赴争取移民选票。

Thanks to Cleveland’s resurgent popularity, and third-party candidate James B. Weaver, Harrison faced an uphill battle in the traditionally Republican Midwest. Looking to secure those states, along with the Eastern cities, Harrison and his Republican allies decided to go all out in their pursuit of the immigrant vote.

在中西部,他们向斯堪的纳维亚人和德裔美国人以及东部的爱尔兰人和意大利人求爱。为了吸引经常用母语授课的美国族裔,哈里森公开主张地方对公立和教会学校进行控制。为了吸引爱尔兰天主教徒,共和党组织了爱尔兰-美国保护关税联盟和爱尔兰-美国共和联盟,并在 1892 年的共和党纲领中加入了对爱尔兰自治的支持——如果有的话,这也是一种象征性的姿态。虽然承认哥伦布是对所有天主教徒的呼吁,但它特别针对意大利裔美国人,自从他们来到新世界以来,他们就一直庆祝克里斯托弗·哥伦布为自己的人。

In the Midwest they courted Scandinavian- and German-Americans, as well as the Irish and Italian groups in the East. To appeal to ethnic Americans who were often taught in their mother tongue, Harrison openly advocated local control of public and parochial schools. To appeal to Irish Catholics, Republicans organized the Irish-American Protective Tariff League and the Irish-American Republican League, inserting an endorsement for Irish home rule in the 1892 Republican Platform—a symbolic gesture if there ever was one. While recognition of Columbus was an appeal to all Catholics, it particularly targeted Italian-Americans, who had been celebrating Cristoforo Colombo as their own for as long as they had been in the New World.

最终,哈里森的“发现日”在选民前往投票站前不到三周的时间庆祝了。尽管时机成熟,此举仍不足以确保哈里森的胜利。克利夫兰以压倒性优势重返白宫。

In the end, Harrison’s “Discovery Day” was celebrated less than 3 weeks before the voters went to the polls. Despite its timing, the move was not enough to secure Harrison’s victory. Cleveland was returned to the White House in a landslide.

尽管“发现日”未能带来哈里森的第二个任期,但事实证明它本身是成功的。伴随着全国各地庆祝哥伦布日的一系列爱国活动,其中一项后来成为学校的持久仪式:由弗朗西斯·贝拉米撰写的效忠誓言。1892 年的发现日,1000 万学童自豪地宣誓效忠美国,无论其宗教信仰或国籍如何。虽然这种做法更具象征意义,而不是实质性的,但在移民寻求展示爱国主义的时代,它引起了强烈的共鸣。对于那些被指控为梵蒂冈外国代理人的人来说尤其如此。这一承诺很快就成为课堂上的日常活动。

Even though “Discovery Day” failed to produce Harrison’s second term, it proved to be a success in its own right. A slate of patriotic activities accompanied celebrations of Columbus Day across the nation, including one that would become an enduring school ritual: the Pledge of Allegiance, written by Francis Bellamy. On Discovery Day, 1892, 10 million schoolchildren proudly swore their loyalty to the United States, regardless of religion or national origin. While the practice was more symbolic than substantive, it resonated powerfully at a time when immigrants sought to display their patriotism. This was especially true for those facing the charge of being foreign agents of the Vatican. The pledge soon became a daily classroom fixture.

尽管其他发现日活动并没有像“哥伦布日之歌”那样具有持久力,但庆祝哥伦布的活动确实如此。1905 年,科罗拉多州州长杰西·F·麦克唐纳 (Jesse F. McDonald) 宣布设立第一个正式的非百年哥伦布日,这一做法后来被其他州效仿。三十年后,在哥伦布骑士团的敦促下,富兰克林·D·罗斯福总统和国会将哥伦布日定为联邦假日,并将官方庆祝活动移至 10 月 12 日。

Although other Discovery Day activities didn’t share the pledge’s staying power, including the “Song of Columbus Day,” celebrating Columbus certainly did. In 1905, Colorado Governor Jesse F. McDonald declared the first official noncentennial Columbus Day, a practice taken up by other states. Thirty years later, at the urging of the Knights of Columbus, President Franklin D. Roosevelt and Congress made Columbus Day a federal holiday, moving the official celebration to October 12.

谜题、问题和历史进程

Puzzles, Questions, and the Process of History

当他们第一次看到哈里森公告时,许多学生都对1492年如此着迷,他们没有注意到这份文件是在400年出现的。将哈里森的宣言置于 1892 年的背景中会改变读者探索哥伦布日故事的下一步。

When they first encounter the Harrison proclamation, many students become so fixated on 1492, they never notice that this document appeared 400 years later. Putting Harrison’s declaration in the context of 1892 changes a reader’s next steps in exploring the story of Columbus Day.

阅读发现日公告的历史学家想要了解这个历史谜题。他们想知道哈里森的声明是否有先例,发现日是否引发了反对或反天主教的强烈抵制。他们很想知道在联邦宣布之前其他州是否已将 10 月 21 日定为假日,如果是,这些州是否有大量天主教徒。最后,他们想知道该活动如何以及何时从一项公告转变为全国性的庆祝活动。

The historians who read the Discovery Day proclamation wanted to understand this historical puzzle. They wanted to know if there was a precedent to Harrison’s declaration, whether Discovery Day had ignited opposition or anti-Catholic backlash. They were curious to know if other states had made October 21 a holiday before the federal declaration, and if so, whether those states had large Catholic populations. Finally, they wanted to know how and when the event had gone from a proclamation to a national celebration.

在历史性地思考这份文件时,历史学家最终走上了与高中生不同的道路。当学生们重新审视他们对哥伦布的了解并重复政治正确的口号时,历史学家发现自己正在面对谜题和问题,以及未经探索和未知的事物。结果,他们面临着更加批判性、更具创造性和更具历史性的思考的挑战。

In thinking historically about the document, historians ended up going down a different path from the high school students. While the students revisited what they already knew about Columbus and repeated politically correct slogans, historians found themselves dealing with puzzles and questions, the unexplored and the unknown. As a result, they were challenged to think more critically, more creatively, and more historically.

最终,历史学家发现了新的信息——不仅关于移民和身份政治,还关于哥伦布不断演变的遗产。无论今天的立场如何,19 世纪末的美国人对哥伦布都抱有一致的积极看法。了解了这一点,学生就不太可能仅仅通过现在的视角来解释哥伦布的庆祝活动。通过将哈里森的宣言等文件放在上下文中,一个新世界打开了——一个充满未解答的问题和看待过去的新方式的世界。

In the end, the historians uncovered new information—not only about immigration and identity politics but also about Columbus’s evolving legacy. Whatever positions they may have today, in the late 19th century Americans held a uniformly positive view of Columbus. Understanding that, students are less likely to interpret celebrations of Columbus solely through the lens of the present. By putting documents like Harrison’s proclamation into context, a new world opens up—one filled with unanswered questions and new ways of looking at the past.

为什么要教授“发现日”?

Why Teach About “Discovery Day”?

教授如何理解上下文中的来源的机会。许多学生被发现日文件中哥伦布的名字蒙蔽了双眼,以至于永远无法忘记它。另一方面,历史学家通过将文献定位在时间和地点来开始阅读。他们首先“来源”并“背景化”一份文件,询问该文件的作者、出现的地点、发布时间以及当前的紧迫问题是什么。通过提出这些问题,历史学家可以更好地理解文献的重要性及其作者的真正动机。

An Opportunity to Teach About Understanding Sources in Context. Many students are so blinded by Columbus’s name in the Discovery Day document that they never get past it. Historians, on the other hand, begin their reading by situating a document in place and time. They begin by “sourcing” and “contextualizing” a document, asking who wrote it, where it appeared, when it was published, and what the burning issues of the day were. By asking such questions, historians develop a better understanding of a document’s significance and the real motives of its author.

就发现日公告而言,许多学生利用 20 世纪对哥伦布航行的解释来批评哈里森的公告。他们不可避免地忽视了该文件是在 1892 年签署的,这一事实引发了一系列问题,即公众人物为何要发布公告。关于发现日的教学提供了一个帮助学生在时间和地点定位文档的机会。它可以向他们展示,发展历史思维习惯将如何本能地将他们指向文档创建的背景。

In the case of the Discovery Day proclamation, many students drew on 20th-century interpretations of Columbus’s voyage to critique Harrison’s proclamation. Inevitably, they overlooked that the document was signed in 1892, a fact that invites a host of questions about why public figures issue proclamations when they do. Teaching about Discovery Day provides an opportunity to help students situate documents in time and place. It can show them how developing historical habits of mind will instinctively point them to the context of a document’s creation.

探索历史用途的机会。历史不断地被赋予各种用途。同一历史人物或事件在不同时期可能被用于不同目的。当新信息出现时,就会发生这种变化,从而需要重新评估。有时,政治和文化发展的变化让我们重新审视之前的解释。就“发现日”而言,两种力量都在发挥作用。一方面,当今的学术界对哥伦布的批评比 19 世纪甚至 20 世纪更加强烈。另一方面,虽然现代的哥伦布庆祝活动被认为对原住民漠不关心,但在 1892 年,它们却是接触饱受诟病的城市天主教徒的一种方式。

A Chance to Explore the Uses to Which History Is Put. History is constantly being put to various uses; the same historical figure or event may be used for different purposes at different times. Such changes can occur when new information comes to light, producing the need for reevaluation. At other times, shifts in political and cultural developments make us look anew at our previous interpretations. In the case of Discovery Day, both forces are at work. On one hand, present-day scholarship is more critical of Columbus than it was in the 19th or even 20th centuries. On the other, while modern celebrations of Columbus are seen as insensitive to native peoples, in 1892 they were a way of reaching out to the maligned urban Catholic.

一个教授随时间变化的机会。学生们经常假设他们出生的世界的布局就是事物一直以来的样子。很难想象美国的天主教徒会持续面临歧视和不忠指控。如今,新教和天主教之间的区别已经不再重要,除非它们涉及堕胎或同性婚姻等问题。但即便如此,天主教徒的投票也并非铁板一块:他们的立场与来自其他宗教的美国人的立场有相当大的重叠。19 世纪对美国天主教徒收到来自罗马的游行命令的恐惧似乎是怪人边缘团体的产物,对公共生活几乎没有影响。尽管如此,直到 1960 年,总统候选人约翰·F·肯尼迪 (John F. Kennedy) 仍不得不为自己辩护,反对有关他的天主教信仰使他不适合担任总统的指控。来源 4.7)。穿越到 1890 年代可以帮助学生了解美国从一个对外来者微弱宽容的新教国家发展成为一个拥有广泛宗教信仰的多元文化国家的历程。

A Chance to Teach About Change over Time. Students often assume that the layout of the world into which they are born is the way things have always been. An America in which Catholics faced constant discrimination and charges of disloyalty is hard to imagine. The distinctions between Protestant and Catholic rarely matter today, except as they touch on issues like abortion or same-sex marriage. But even here, the Catholic vote is hardly monolithic: There is considerable overlap between their stances and those held by Americans from other religions. The 19th-century fear that American Catholics were receiving marching orders from Rome seems like the stuff of wacko fringe groups with little influence on public life. Still, as late as 1960, presidential hopeful John F. Kennedy was obliged to defend himself against charges that his Catholicism rendered him unfit to be president (Source 4.7). An excursion into the 1890s helps students understand how far America has come in its journey from being a Protestant country that faintly tolerated outsiders to a multicultural nation with a wide range of religious faiths.

连接到今天。发现日展示了总统政纲如何应对美国的人口剧变,预示着一种已成为政治格局中固定策略的策略:向不同选民伸出援手并争取选票。哈里森的竞选活动打开了一扇窗,让我们了解为什么政客们会吸引来自不同背景(种族、民族和宗教)的选民,以及随着美国变得更加多元化,这种做法是如何增加的。考虑到哈里森在 1890 年代的动机,不禁让人对当今的移民和总统政治产生疑问,包括当代候选人如何调整自己的信息以讨好不同群体。

Connection to Today. Discovery Day shows how a presidential platform addressed the demographic upheavals of America, prefiguring a tactic that has become a fixture in the political landscape: reaching out and courting votes among varied constituencies. Harrison’s campaign opens a window on why politicians court voters from different backgrounds—racial, ethnic, and religious—and how this practice has increased as America has become more diverse. Considering Harrison’s motives in the 1890s raises questions about today’s immigration and presidential politics, including how contemporary candidates tailor their message to curry favor with different groups.

您将如何使用这些材料?

How Might You Use These Materials?

场景 1(1-2 小时课程)。哪个日期最重要,1492 年还是 1892 年?学习将文档放在上下文中,并了解是什么影响了哈里森发表“发现日”宣言。

Scenario 1 (1–2 Hour Lesson). What date matters most, 1492 or 1892? Learn to put a document in context and understand what influenced Harrison to make his “Discovery Day” proclamation.


CCSS

6–8 #1

11–12 #7

CCSS

6–8 #1

11–12 #7


要求学生阅读发现日公告(来源 4.1),但首先删除文档的日期和作者。让学生写下他们对文件的回应,并记下他们会提出的有关文件历史背景的问题。除非您已经完成了一些将文档放在上下文中的工作,否则许多学生会专注于哥伦布的麻烦遗产,而从未想过询问文档何时编写或出于什么目的。在简要讨论学生的回答后,向他们提供文档的日期和作者,并要求他们写下这些新信息可能引发的想法。

Ask students to read the Discovery Day proclamation (Source 4.1), but first eliminate the document’s date and author. Have students write down their responses to the document and jot down questions they would ask about its historical context. Unless you’ve already done some work on placing documents in context, many students will zoom in on Columbus’s troubled legacy and never think to ask when the document was written or for what purpose. After briefly discussing students’ responses, give them the document’s date and author, and ask them to write down ideas that these new pieces of information may prompt.

指出 1892 年是选举年后,将学生分成小组,思考哈里森宣布“发现日”为全国性假日的动机(参见工具 4.1)。每组提供资料来源4.1、4.2、4.3和4.4。根据您有多少时间,提供其他文档,例如Source 4.5布置一篇文章,让学生解释哈里森为何发布“发现日”公告,以及 1892 年的事件如何影响了该文件的解读方式。

After pointing out that 1892 was an election year, divide students into groups to consider Harrison’s motives in proclaiming “Discovery Day” a national holiday (see Tool 4.1). Give each group Sources 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, and 4.4. Depending on how much time you have, provide additional documents, such as Source 4.5. Assign an essay in which students explain why Harrison issued his “Discovery Day” proclamation when he did, and how the events of 1892 shape how the document should be read.

图像


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 情境化来源
  • Contextualizing sources
  • 质疑消息来源
  • Questioning sources
  • 证实消息来源
  • Corroborating sources
  • 基于证据的思考和论证
  • Evidence-based thinking and argumentation

场景 2(2-4 小时课程)。关注上下文。此场景是前一个场景的扩展,旨在让学生更多地练习在上下文中阅读文档。

Scenario 2 (2–4 Hour Lesson). Focus on context. This scenario expands on the previous one, and is designed to give students more practice reading documents in context.


CCSS

#9

CCSS

#9


首先,使用资料来源4.1、4.2、4.3、4.4和4.5引导他们进行上述分析讨论。在这种情况下,学生将面临反天主教偏见的问题,正如内战时期有关无知党的摘录(来源 4.6)和约翰·F·肯尼迪 1960 年面对反天主教领袖问题的演讲中所见-on(来源 4.7)。考虑让学生比较不同时期的移民政策问题。问题在哪些方面相同和不同?让学生有机会思考过去一百年来宗教问题如何影响有关移民的辩论。

First, lead them through the analysis and discussion described above, using Sources 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, and 4.5. In this scenario, students will confront the issue of anti-Catholic prejudice, as seen in the Civil War-era excerpt about the Know-Nothing Party (Source 4.6) and John F. Kennedy’s 1960 speech that confronted the issue of anti-Catholicism head-on (Source 4.7). Consider having students compare issues of immigration policy across time. In what ways are issues the same and different? Give students an opportunity to consider how the issue of religion has influenced debates about immigration during the last hundred years.

图像

或者,更深入地了解移民的特定时代和哈里森的公告。一旦学生熟悉了 1890 年代更广泛的问题,就可以阅读本章开头雅各布对哈里森公告的回应。请他们考虑雅各布缺少什么。让学生写一篇文章,说明高中生雅各布在评论哈里森公告时错过了什么。

Alternately, go deeper with the particular era of immigration and Harrison’s proclamation. Once students are acquainted with the broader issues of the 1890s, read them Jacob’s response to the Harrison proclamation at the beginning of this chapter. Ask them to consider what Jacob is missing. Have students write an essay about what Jacob, the high school student, missed when he commented on the Harrison proclamation.

图像


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 情境化来源
  • Contextualizing sources
  • 质疑消息来源
  • Questioning sources
  • 证实消息来源
  • Corroborating sources
  • 基于证据的思考和论证
  • Evidence-based thinking and argumentation
  • 与最近的历史建立联系
  • Making connections to more recent history

场景 3(1-2 小时课程)。这个场景将帮助学生分析不同时代的社论漫画。我们使用托马斯·纳斯特(Thomas Nast)的插图(来源4.8),他不仅是美国最著名的社论漫画家之一,而且还是使大象和驴成为两大政党象征的主要人物。

Scenario 3 (1–2 Hour Lesson). This scenario will help students analyze an editorial cartoon from a different era. We use an illustration by Thomas Nast (Source 4.8), who was not only one of the most famous editorial cartoonists in America, but also the man largely responsible for making the elephant and donkey the symbols of two major political parties.


CCSS

6–8 #2, #7

9–10 #5

CCSS

6–8 #2, #7

9–10 #5


我们有时认为卡通很容易让学生理解,因为它们通过图片而不是文字表达观点。虽然这对于当代图像来说可能是正确的,但试图解码遥远过去的卡通则是另一回事。今天,乔治·W·布什那张巨大的下垂的耳朵,正是使图像变得易于理解的特征,而当学生试图解读来自不同时代的社论漫画时,正是这些特征让学生们感到困惑。1870 年读者所认识的代码和符号对于今天的学生(通常也是我们)来说通常是难以理解的。

We sometimes assume that cartoons are easy for students to understand because they make their point in pictures, not in words. While this might hold true for contemporary images, trying to decode a cartoon from the distant past is a different story. The very features that make an image easy to understand today—George W. Bush’s huge floppy ears—are what will trip up students when trying to decipher an editorial cartoon from a different era. Codes and symbols that readers would recognize in 1870 will often be indecipherable to today’s students (and often to us as well).

社论漫画采用了许多学生不熟悉的一系列惯例。为此,我们开发了助记工具“BASIC”(工具4.2)来帮助学生破解漫画的密码。

Editorial cartoons employ a series of conventions that are unfamiliar to many students. For this purpose, we have developed a mnemonic tool, “B.A.S.I.C.” (Tool 4.2), to help students crack a cartoon’s code.

社论漫画的目标不同于寻求娱乐或娱乐的普通漫画(例如加里·拉尔森或呆伯特)。如果社论漫画让我们微笑,那只是副作用,而不是主要目标。首先,社论漫画传达的信息带有尖锐的政治或社会批评。社论漫画有其道理,有时甚至非常尖锐。

The goal of an editorial cartoon is different from regular cartoons (think Gary Larson or Dilbert) that seek to amuse or entertain. If an editorial cartoon makes us smile, it’s a side effect, not the primary goal. First and foremost, editorial cartoons convey messages that carry a trenchant political or social critique. Editorial cartoons have a point, sometimes a very sharp one.

Source 4.8显示了纳斯特最著名的漫画之一《美国恒河》,该漫画于 1871 年 9 月 30 日发表在《哈珀周刊》上,并于 1875 年以略有不同的形式出版。尽管它无处不在(该漫画出现在数十个网站上) ),如果没有精心搭建的入口进入这个陌生的世界,很少有学生能够解开它的含义。

Source 4.8 displays one of Nast’s most famous cartoons, “The American River Ganges,” published in Harper’s Weekly on September 30, 1871, and again, in a slightly different form, in 1875. Despite its ubiquity (the cartoon appears on dozens of websites), few students will be able to unlock its meaning without a carefully scaffolded entree to this unfamiliar world.

《美国恒河》出现在关于纽约州天主教学校公共资助的辩论中。1869 年,威廉·“老板”·特威德(William“Boss”Tweed)起草了一项法案,允许纽约市资助拥有 200 名或更多学生的教会学校(一般来说,这仅适用于天主教学校,因为新教和犹太教学校通常要小得多)。当媒体得知特威德的计划时,他们用“教皇”的反天主教嘲讽来涂油和粉饰它。尽管纽约立法机构中的共和党多数派否决了该法案,但木已成舟:人们担心天主教徒决心从公立学校拿走资金,以推行险恶的“罗马”议程。9

“The American River Ganges” appeared during a debate over public funding of Catholic schools in New York State. In 1869, William “Boss” Tweed, whose powerful Democratic headquarters, Tammany Hall, symbolized graft and corruption, authored a bill to allow New York City to fund parochial schools of 200 students or more (in general, this applied only to Catholic schools, as Protestant and Jewish schools were typically much smaller). When the press learned of Tweed’s scheme, they tarred and feathered it with anti-Catholic taunts of “Popery.” Although the Republican majority in the New York legislature killed the bill, the die was cast: People feared that Catholics were determined to take money away from the public schools to promote a sinister “Roman” agenda.9

在要求学生解答“美国恒河”这个谜题之前,首先要回顾一下 BASIC 缩写词(工具 4.2)。首先,尝试在当代社论漫画上进行实践,其含义对于现代观众来说更加清晰。在我们的教学中,我们发现三部分序列在解码卡通、艺术品和照片等视觉证据时非常有用。我们首先要求学生描述他们所看到的内容,并密切关注图像的细节。通过将其作为全班活动进行,学生们可以集体看到比他们个人第一次看到的东西更多的东西。一旦学生们耗尽了图像的细节,我们就会继续解释我们所看到的内容。本阶段工具4.3让学生熟悉纳斯特使用的符号和指示符(主教帽、圣彼得大教堂等)将是至关重要的。

Before asking students to tackle the riddle that is “The American River Ganges,” begin by going over the B.A.S.I.C. acronym (Tool 4.2). First, try practicing it on contemporary editorial cartoons, whose meanings are more transparent to modern audiences. In our teaching, we have found that a three-part sequence is useful when decoding visual evidence such as cartoons, artwork, and photographs. We begin by asking students to describe what they see, staying close to the details of the image. By doing this as a whole-class activity, students can collectively glimpse more than whatever first meets their individual eyes. Once students have exhausted the details of the image, we move on to interpreting what we see. For this stage Tool 4.3 will be crucial, familiarizing students with symbols and indicators used by Nast (mitres, St. Peter’s Basilica, and so on).

在最后阶段——推测——学生们准备好解决漫画家的论点。工具 4.4包含指导学生完成此分析的问题。使用这组问题将使学生能够对“美国恒河”进行观察,而不会形成不必要的结论或解释。

During the final stage—speculating—students are ready to tackle the cartoonist’s argument. Tool 4.4 includes questions that guide students through this analysis. Using this set of questions will allow students to make observations about “The American River Ganges” without unnecessarily forming conclusions or interpretations.

图像

引起学生注意漫画中的鳄鱼:它们是真的吗?他们穿什么?确保学生注意到岸上的男孩和后面挤着小孩子的男孩与背景中的其他孩子之间的区别。他们注意到那本书从大男孩的口袋里伸出来了吗?书上说了什么?最后,当学生思考漫画的含义时,帮助建立恒河和天主教之间的联系(即恒河对于印度教徒来说是神圣的,而印度教徒认为这种宗教是外来的和“野蛮的”) 。

Draw students’ attention to the crocodiles shown in the cartoon: Are they real? What are they wearing? Make sure students note the difference between the boy onshore with smaller children huddled behind him, and the other children in the background. Do they notice the book protruding from the older boy’s pocket? What does the book say? Finally, when students speculate about the meaning of the cartoon, help make the connection between the Ganges River and Catholicism (i.e., the Ganges is sacred to the Hindus, a religion considered by many 19th-century Americans to be foreign and “barbaric”).


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 分析政治漫画
  • Analyzing political cartoons
  • 情境化来源
  • Contextualizing sources
  • 质疑消息来源
  • Questioning sources





来源和工具

Sources and Tools

资料来源4.1:哈里森公告(修改

SOURCE 4.1: HARRISON’S PROCLAMATION (MODIFIED)


美利坚合众国总统公告

By the President of the United States of America A Proclamation

因此,现在,我,美利坚合众国总统本杰明·哈里森,根据上述联合决议,特此任命 1892 年 10 月 21 日星期五,即哥伦布发现美洲四百周年为将军。美国人民的假期。在那一天,让人民尽可能停止劳作,全身心投入到最能表达对发现者的敬意和对美国四个世纪的伟大成就的赞赏的活动中。

Now, therefore, I, Benjamin Harrison, President of the United States of America, in pursuance of the aforesaid joint resolution, do hereby appoint Friday, October 21, 1892, the four hundredth anniversary of the discovery of America by Columbus, as a general holiday for the people of the United States. On that day let the people, so far as possible, cease from toil and devote themselves to such exercises as may best express honor to the discoverer and their appreciation of the great achievements of the four completed centuries of American life.

哥伦布在他的时代是进步和启蒙运动的先驱。普及教育制度是我们这个时代启蒙精神最突出和最有益的特征,人民把学校作为当今示威的中心是特别合适的。让国旗飘扬在全国每所校舍上空,让我们的年轻人铭记美国公民的爱国义务。

Columbus stood in his age as the pioneer of progress and enlightenment. The system of universal education is in our age the most prominent and salutary feature of the spirit of enlightenment, and it is peculiarly appropriate that the schools be made by the people the center of the day’s demonstration. Let the national flag float over every schoolhouse in the country and the exercises be such as shall impress upon our youth the patriotic duties of American citizenship.

在教堂和其他人民集会场所,让人们表达对神圣天意的感激之情,感谢上帝的发现者的虔诚信仰,以及上帝的关怀和指导,指导了我们的历史,并如此丰富地祝福了我们的人民。

In the churches and in the other places of assembly of the people let there be expressions of gratitude to Divine Providence for the devout faith of the discoverer and for the divine care and guidance which has directed our history and so abundantly blessed our people.


资料来源:本杰明·哈里森总统 1892 年 7 月 21 日的公告。

Source: President Benjamin Harrison’s Proclamation, July 21, 1892.

 

 

资料来源4.2:美国天主教

SOURCE 4.2: CATHOLICISM IN AMERICA


作为美国天主教徒,我们不知道还有谁比这位伟大而高贵的人更值得我们怀念——虔诚、热心、忠实的天主教徒、进取的航海家、宽宏大量的水手:克里斯托弗·哥伦布。

As American Catholics we do not know of anyone who more deserves our grateful remembrance than the great and noble man—the pious, zealous, faithful Catholic, the enterprising navigator, and the large-hearted and generous sailor: Christopher Columbus.


资料来源:摘录,作者不详,“克里斯托弗·哥伦布——新大陆的发现者”,康涅狄格天主教,1878 年 5 月 25 日,4。

Source: Excerpt, unknown author, “Christopher Columbus—Discoverer of the New World,” Connecticut Catholic, May 25, 1878, 4.

 

 

资料来源4.3:哥伦布K

SOURCE 4.3: KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS


图像

成绩单:

Transcript:

“第一个议题是为新社团选择一个名称。麦吉夫尼神父建议将其命名为“哥伦布之子”,并表示通过采用这个名称,我们将在某种程度上表明该组织的天主教和美国特征和倾向。詹姆斯·T·马伦(James T. Mullen)发言,他在发言中表示,如果他理解正确的话,新社会将是一个仪式化的社会。如果是这样的话,他将对麦吉夫尼神父的建议提出修正案,该社团应被称为哥伦布骑士团。”

“The first subject taken up was the selection of a name for the new society. Father McGivney suggested as a name ‘Sons of Columbus,’ stating that by the adoption of this name, we would be indicating in a way the Catholic and American character and tendency of the Order. James T. Mullen took the floor, and in his remarks said that if he understood the situation correctly, the new society was to be a ritualistic one. If such were the case, he would offer an amendment to Father McGivney’s suggestion, and that the society should be known as the Knights of Columbus.”


资料来源:摘自 Daniel Colwell,《哥伦布骑士团:第一次骑士团会议》,The Columbiad,1910 年 3 月。

Source: Excerpt from Daniel Colwell, “The Knights of Columbus: First Meeting of the Order,” The Columbiad, March 1910.

 

 

资料来源4.4:国籍划分美国移民:1850-1930

SOURCE 4.4: IMMIGRATION TO THE UNITED STATES BY NATIONALITY: 1850–1930


图像


资料来源:美国人口普查局。网址:http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0029/tab04.html

Source: U.S. Census Bureau. Available at http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0029/tab04.html

 

 

资料来源4.5:哈里森演讲改编

SOURCE 4.5: HARRISON SPEECH (ADAPTED)


有些人可能会认为,英国议会正在辩论的与爱尔兰有关的待决立法问题不适合在美国城镇会议上讨论。我们对英国政府的行为没有正式发言权。它可以注意到或不注意到我们在这里所做的和所说的,但我们仍然会行使说话的自由。我们来这里并不是要建议英国给予爱尔兰独立。我们在这里只是想说,在我们作为美国公民看来,爱尔兰需要的不是强制,不是警察,不是拿着步枪和刺刀的士兵。爱尔兰需要的是自由主义法律,解放她的人民摆脱了几个世纪以来糟糕政府的影响。当英国这个部门开始走向胁迫的方向,并推迟改革建议时,它就走在了错误的方向上。

Some may suggest that the question of the pending legislation relating to Ireland, which is being debated in the British Parliament, is not a proper subject of discussion in an American town meeting. We have no official say in what the British government does. It can take notice or not of what we do and say here, but all the same we will exercise the liberty of saying it. We are not here to suggest to Great Britain that she shall grant the Irish their independence. We are here simply to say that, in our opinion as American citizens, what Ireland needs is not coercion, is not the constable, is not the soldier with musket and bayonet. What Ireland needs is liberal laws, that emancipate her people from the results of long centuries of ill government. When this British Ministry starts in the direction of coercion, and postpones suggestions for reform, it is traveling in the wrong direction.


资料来源:本杰明·哈里森 1887 年 4 月 8 日在印第安纳波利斯发表的竞选演讲。

Source: Campaign speech made by Benjamin Harrison in Indianapolis, April 8, 1887.


字库

WORD BANK


胁迫——被迫的行为

coercion—the act of being forced

警员——警察

constable—a policeman

解放——自由

to emancipate—to free


(原来的)

(Original)

也许有人会说,我们今晚所做的事情有点无礼——英国议会讨论的有关爱尔兰的悬而未决的立法问题,并不是英国议会讨论的适当主题。美国城镇会议…… 我们没有向英国政府提出正式交涉。它可以注意到或不注意到我们在这里所做的和所说的,但我们仍然会行使说出来的自由……。我们来这里并不是要建议英国承认爱尔兰独立……。我们在这里只是想说,在我们作为美国公民看来,爱尔兰需要的不是强制,不是警察,不是拿着滑膛枪和刺刀的士兵;但自由主义法律倾向于将她的人民从长达几个世纪的不良政府的后果中解放出来,

It may be suggested that we are engaged to-night in an act that savors somewhat of impertinence—that the question of the pending legislation relating to Ireland, which is the subject of discussion in the British Parliament, is not a proper subject of discussion in an American town meeting…. We have no official representations to make to the British government. It can take notice or not of what we do and say here, but all the same we will exercise the liberty of saying it…. We are not here to suggest to Great Britain that she shall concede Irish independence…. We are here simply to say that, in our opinion as American citizens, what Ireland needs is not coercion, is not the constable, is not the soldier with musket and bayonet; but liberal laws, tending to emancipate her people from the results of long centuries of ill government, and that when this British Ministry starts in the direction of coercion, and postpones suggestions for reform until a coercion bill has been enacted, it is traveling in the wrong direction.

 

 





来源4.6 无知_ _ _

SOURCE 4.6: KNOW-NOTHING PARTY


该组织的目标是保护每一位美国公民合法和适当地行使其所有公民和宗教权利和特权;以一切合法方式抵制罗马教会的阴险政策和所有其他针对我们共和机构的外国影响;以人民的恩赐或任命的方式,将所有荣誉、信任或利益的职位安排给本地出生的新教公民,并保护、维护和维护这些州的联邦和宪法。

The object of this organization shall be to protect every American citizen in the legal and proper exercise of all his civil and religious rights and privileges; to resist the insidious policy of the Church of Rome and all other foreign influence against our republican institutions in all lawful ways; to place in all offices of honor, trust, or profit, in the gift of the people or by appointment, none but native-born Protestant citizens and to protect, preserve, and uphold the Union of these States and the Constitution of the same.


资料来源:北美合众国国家委员会(又称“一无所知党”)第二条。大约 1855 年。

Source: Article II of the National Council of the United States of North America, otherwise known as the Know-Nothing Party. Circa 1855.


字库

WORD BANK


阴险—邪恶

insidious—evil


资料来源4.7 肯尼迪演讲

SOURCE 4.7: KENNEDY SPEECH


注:1960 年 9 月 12 日,总统候选人约翰·F·肯尼迪在大休斯敦部长级协会发表演讲。当时许多人质疑肯尼迪的天主教信仰是否会干扰他领导国家的能力。

Note: On September 12, 1960, presidential candidate John F. Kennedy gave a speech to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association. Many at the time questioned whether Kennedy’s Catholic faith would interfere with his ability to lead the country.

因为我是一名天主教徒,而且从来没有天主教徒当选总统,所以这次竞选中的真正问题被掩盖了,也许是故意的,在某些方面比这更不负责任。因此,我显然有必要再次声明我信仰什么样的教会——因为那只对我来说才重要——而是声明我信仰什么样的美国……。

Because I am a Catholic, and no Catholic has ever been elected president, the real issues in this campaign have been obscured, perhaps deliberately, in some quarters less responsible than this. So it is apparently necessary for me to state once again not what kind of church I believe in—for that should be important only to me—but what kind of America I believe in….

我相信美国在官方上既不是天主教、新教也不是犹太教……没有任何宗教团体试图将其意志直接或间接强加于普通民众或其官员的公共行为……。

I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish … where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials….

最后,我相信美国的宗教不宽容终有一天会结束;所有人和所有教会都受到平等对待;每个人都有相同的权利参加或不参加他选择的教堂;没有天主教投票、反天主教投票、任何形式的集体投票;在那里,天主教徒、新教徒和犹太人……将避免那些过去经常损害他们作品的蔑视和分裂态度,转而宣扬美国的兄弟情谊理想……。

Finally, I believe in an America where religious intolerance will someday end; where all men and all churches are treated as equal; where every man has the same right to attend or not attend the church of his choice; where there is no Catholic vote, no anti-Catholic vote, no bloc voting of any kind; and where Catholics, Protestants and Jews … will refrain from those attitudes of disdain and division which have so often marred their works in the past, and promote instead the American ideal of brotherhood….

如果我在真正的问题上失败,我将回到参议院的席位,对我已尽力而为并得到公正的评价感到满意。但如果这次选举是基于四千万美国人在受洗当天失去了成为总统的机会,那么在全世界天主教徒和非天主教徒看来,整个国家都将成为失败者,在历史的眼中,在我们自己的人民的眼中。

If I should lose on the real issues, I shall return to my seat in the Senate, satisfied that I had tried my best and was fairly judged. But if this election is decided on the basis that forty million Americans lost their chance of being president on the day they were baptized, then it is the whole nation that will be the loser—in the eyes of Catholics and non-Catholics around the world, in the eyes of history, and in the eyes of our own people.


资料来源:摘自总统候选人约翰·肯尼迪 (John F. Kennedy) 1960 年 9 月 12 日的演讲。

Source: Excerpt from a speech given by presidential candidate John F. Kennedy, September 12, 1960.

 

 

来源4.8 NAST卡通_

SOURCE 4.8: NAST CARTOON


图像


来源:Thomas Nast,“美国恒河”,Harper's Weekly,1871 年 9 月 30 日(另见http://www.aoh61.com/images/ir_cartoons/river_ganges.htm)。

Source: Thomas Nast, “The American River Ganges,” Harper’s Weekly, September 30, 1871 (see also http://www.aoh61.com/images/ir_cartoons/river_ganges.htm).

 

 





工具4.1 :来源置于上下文

TOOL 4.1: PUTTING A SOURCE IN CONTEXT


说明:使用资料 4.24.5帮助您了解哈里森为何在 1892 年设立发现日。

Directions: Use Sources 4.24.5 to help you understand why Harrison established Discovery Day in 1892.

1. 该消息来源告诉我们 1892 年发生了什么?

1. What does this source tell us was going on in 1892?

2. 本资料中提出的事件或问题可能如何影响哈里森?

2. How might the events or issues presented in this source have influenced Harrison?

3. 读完这些资料后,你认为哈里森为什么要在 1892 年设立“发现日”?

3. After reading these sources, why do you think Harrison established “Discovery Day” in 1892?





工具4.2 基本

TOOL 4.2: B.A.S.I.C.


基础:解读社论漫画的步骤

B.A.S.I.C.: Steps to Interpreting Editorial Cartoons

 

 

编辑漫画使用将密集信息打包到狭小空间中的功能。首字母缩略词 BASIC 提醒您在探索不同时间的卡通片时要寻找什么。

Editorial cartoons use features that pack dense information into a small space. The acronym B.A.S.I.C. reminds you what to look for when exploring a cartoon from a different time.

B:背景知识

B: Background Knowledge

漫画家做出了某些假设,其中之一是他们和他们的读者共享一个共同的世界。在一部关于国土安全部特工脱衣搜查的漫画中,艺术家可以描绘两座燃烧的建筑物,我们会立即认出它们是世贸中心双子塔。这些功能是如此基本,以至于我们认为它们是理所当然的,但在另一代人左右,它们就不再是理所当然的了。当我们解读一百年前的漫画时,我们常常缺乏必要的背景知识来破解漫画的密码。研究漫画出现的时期可以帮助你弄清楚艺术家想表达什么。

Cartoonists make certain assumptions, and one of them is that they and their readers share a common world. In a cartoon about strip searches by Homeland Security agents, an artist can depict two burning buildings, and we’ll immediately recognize them as the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center. These features are so basic that we take them for granted, yet in another generation or so they won’t be. When we interpret a cartoon from a hundred years ago, we often lack necessary background knowledge to crack the cartoon’s code. Studying the period in which a cartoon appeared can help you figure out what the artist is trying to say.

答:论证

A: Argument

BASIC 中的 A 代表“论证”。尽管社论漫画可以让我们开怀大笑,但它们有一个更严肃的目标:传达一个观点并说服我们采取一个立场。当你看漫画时,问问自己:“艺术家想让我想到什么?” 尝试用简短的陈述陈述艺术家的观点或论点,例如,“从这幅漫画中,可以清楚地看出作者认为对外国石油的依赖将毁掉美国。”

The A in B.A.S.I.C. stands for “argument.” Although editorial cartoons can make us laugh or smile, they have a more serious goal: to convey a point and convince us to adopt a position. When you look at a cartoon, ask yourself, “What does the artist want me to think?” Try to state the artist’s point, or thesis, in a short statement, e.g., “From this cartoon, it is clear that the author thinks dependence on foreign oil will ruin America.”

S:象征主义

S: Symbolism

卡通片使用符号将大量信息打包到一个框架中。符号是指向比其本身更广泛的事物的名称。新月、六角星和十字架不仅仅是月亮、星星或几何图形。它们分别代表整个宗教文明:伊斯兰教、犹太教和基督教。符号是每个社论漫画家工具箱的一部分。

Cartoons use symbols to pack a lot of information into a single frame. Symbols are designations that point to something broader than themselves. A crescent, a six-pointed star, and a cross are more than moons, stars, or geometric figures. They stand for entire religious civilizations: Islam, Judaism, and Christianity, respectively. Symbols are part of the toolbox of every editorial cartoonist.

一:指标

I: Indicators

但符号不能单独做到这一点。漫画家使用指标或书面标签来为我们指明某个方向。通常,指标直接告诉我们某物代表什么(并且可能是漫画中使用的唯一词语)。除了漫画的标题和说明之外,还要留意其他指示符,有时可以在漫画正文中的小字中找到这些指示符。

But symbols can’t do it alone. Cartoonists use indicators, or written labels, that point us in a certain direction. Often, indicators tell us directly what something stands for (and may be the only words used in the cartoon). In addition to the cartoon’s title and caption, be on the lookout for other indicators, sometimes found in small print in the body of the cartoon itself.

C:漫画

C: Caricature

漫画遵循这句格言:“值得陈述的事情值得夸大”,漫画就是这种夸张的例证。当我们遇到交通堵塞时,我们可能会说:“我们前面有一百万辆车!离开这里需要很多年的时间。” 本着同样的精神,漫画家将糟糕的政府政策比作十大瘟疫之一,或者将年老的候选人比作千岁老人。漫画还可以采用刻板印象、扭曲的图像来夸大整个群体的特征。这些图像,尤其是来自不同时代的图像,在我们现代人看来往往是种族主义或偏执的。

Cartoons follow the adage, “What’s worth stating is worth overstating,” and caricature exemplifies such exaggeration. When we’re stuck in a traffic jam, we might say, “There are a million cars in front of us! It’ll take years to get out of here.” In the same spirit, cartoonists compare a bad government policy to one of the Ten Plagues, or an aging candidate to the Thousand-Year-Old Man. Caricature can also employ stereotypes, distorted images that exaggerate the features of entire groups. Such images, particularly those from a different era, often seem racist or bigoted to our modern eyes.

 

 





工具4.3 :解读托马斯·纳斯特美洲恒河” _ _ _ _ _

TOOL 4.3: DECODING THOMAS NAST’S “THE AMERICAN RIVER GANGES


此背景信息将帮助您回答以下讲义中的问题。

This background information will help you answer questions in the following handout.

1)主教冠:教皇、主教和红衣主教佩戴的宗教头巾。

1) Mitre: a religious head covering worn by the Pope, as well as bishops and cardinals.

图像

教皇戴的法冠(头巾),http://www.godsonlygospel.com/POPE~4.JPG

A mitre (head covering) worn by the Pope, http://www.godsonlygospel.com/POPE~4.JPG

2)圣彼得大教堂:圣彼得大教堂位于梵蒂冈城,是教皇的主教堂,也是罗马天主教堂举行官方仪式的场所。天主教传统认为,这座教堂是十二使徒之一、罗马第一位主教圣彼得的埋葬地。

2) Basilica of St. Peter: Located in Vatican City, St. Peter’s Basilica is the Pope’s principal church, and home to official ceremonies of the Roman Catholic Church. Catholic tradition holds that this church is the burial site of its namesake, Saint Peter, one of the Twelve Apostles and the first Bishop of Rome.

图像

罗马圣彼得大教堂(即带有圆顶的大型建筑),象征天主教堂的“母堂”。照片可在http://countries-of-europe.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/St.-Peters-Basilica1.jpg获取

Saint Peter’s Basilica in Rome (i.e., the large building with a dome), symbolic “Mother Church” of the Catholic Church. Photograph available at http://countries-of-europe.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/St.-Peters-Basilica1.jpg

3)哥伦比亚:17 世纪末新世界的同义词,哥伦比亚特区以“哥伦比亚”命名,象征性地表现为女性形象。她身着简单的白色长袍,经常手持自由杆、美国国旗或宪法,并经常伴随着一只鹰。作为一个标志,哥伦比亚号让人想起克里斯托弗·哥伦布,表面上是美洲的“发现者”,她的名字就来自于他,同时也是一个代表自由和进步的寓言人物。

3) Columbia: A late-17th-century synonym for the New World, “Columbia,” for which the District of Columbia is named, is symbolically represented as a female figure. Depicted in a simple white gown, she is frequently shown holding the liberty pole, the American flag, or the Constitution, and is often accompanied by an eagle. As an icon, Columbia evokes Christopher Columbus, the ostensible “discoverer” of America, from whom she derives her name, while also functioning as an allegorical figure who represents liberty and progress.

图像

第一次世界大战征兵海报中哥伦比亚小姐的形象。“哥伦比亚呼吁——立即加入美国陆军”,由弗朗西斯·亚当斯·霍尔斯特德 (Frances Adams Halsted) 设计;由 V. Aderente 绘制。1916. 美国国会图书馆版画和照片部,华盛顿特区,http://lcweb2.loc.gov/service/pnp/cph/3g00000/3g03000/3g03600/3g03685v.jpg

Image of Miss Columbia in a World War I recruiting poster. “Columbia calls—Enlist Now for U.S. Army,” designed by Frances Adams Halsted; painted by V. Aderente. 1916. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division, Washington, D.C., http://lcweb2.loc.gov/service/pnp/cph/3g00000/3g03000/3g03600/3g03685v.jpg

4)坦慕尼协会:坦慕尼协会(又称“圣坦慕尼之子”和“哥伦比勋章”)成立于 1789 年,是整个 19 世纪纽约市政治的核心。该组织在坦慕尼协会的总部外运作,是民主党在该市的附属机构,随着它赢得了移民的忠诚(其中许多人是爱尔兰天主教徒),影响力不断扩大。坦慕尼协会的“老板”通过公共宣传、政治赞助和腐败系统进行管理,是纽约州最有权势的政治家之一。其中最著名的是威廉·“老板”·特威德,他甚至在结束监狱生活之前赢得了纽约州参议院的席位。

4) Tammany Hall: Founded in 1789, the Tammany Society (alternately known as “the Sons of St. Tammany” and “the Columbian Order”) was at the heart of New York City politics throughout the 19th century. Operating out of Tammany Hall, the organization was the city affiliate for the Democratic Party and grew in influence as it gained the loyalty of immigrants, many of whom were Irish Catholics. Governing through a system of public outreach, political patronage, and corruption, Tammany “bosses” were among the most powerful politicians in New York State. The most famous of them, William “Boss” Tweed, even won a seat in the New York State Senate before ending his days in prison.

 

 

5)倒立的旗帜:倒立的国旗是不幸的常见象征。根据史密斯海军上将 1867 年出版的《水手名言书》,当一艘船“面临迫在眉睫的危险”时,船员会“将国旗倒挂起来,如果她携带武器,就会开小炮”。

5) The Inverted Flag: An upside-down national flag is a common symbol of distress. According to Admiral Smyth’s Sailor’s Word Book of 1867, when a ship is “in imminent danger,” its crew “hoists her national flag upside down, and if she is armed, fires minute guns.”

 

 

6)恒河:恒河流经印度约 1,500 英里。它被印度教徒视为圣河,他们沿着河岸沿着被称为“高止山脉”的石阶走下,在河水中沐浴朝圣。印度教徒赋予恒河水特殊的力量。19世纪,许多美国人认为印度教徒及其宗教习俗不仅奇怪、充满异国情调,而且不如西方更“发达”的宗教传统。

6) The Ganges River: The Ganges runs roughly 1,500 miles through India. It is considered a holy river by the Hindus, who make pilgrimages to bathe in its waters by descending the stone steps called “ghats” along its banks. Hindus attribute special powers to the Ganges waters. In the 19th century, many Americans considered Hindus and their religious practices not only strange and exotic, but inferior to the more “developed” religious traditions of the West.


资料来源:“贝拿勒斯:从高止山脉拍摄的景色”,Elisee Reclus,《地球及其居民》,1884 年。

Source: “Benares: View Taken from the Ghats,” Elisee Reclus, The Earth and Its Inhabitants, 1884.

 

 





工具4.4 :托马斯·纳斯特美洲恒河》_ _ _ _

TOOL 4.4: THOMAS NAST’S “THE AMERICAN RIVER GANGES


  1. 仔细观察鳄鱼出没的水域。鳄鱼头上有什么?这象征着什么?
  2. Look carefully at the crocodile-infested waters. What do the crocodiles have on their heads? What does this symbolize?
  3. 这部漫画中的鳄鱼代表什么?
  4. What do the crocodiles in this cartoon represent?
  5. 是谁把孩子扔下悬崖的?
  6. Who are the people casting the children off the cliff?
  7. 被拖上绞刑架的女人是谁?
  8. Who is the woman being dragged to the gallows?
  9. 这部漫画中有两栋建筑;两者都包含“指示符”来帮助读者正确理解漫画。这些指标是什么?它们告诉您有关卡通的信息是什么?
  10. There are two buildings in this cartoon; both contain “indicators” to help the reader correctly interpret the cartoon. What are these indicators and what do they tell you about the cartoon’s message?
  11. 这位漫画家的论点是什么?他希望读者看完这部漫画后想到什么?
  12. What is the argument of this cartoonist? What does he want the reader to think after viewing this cartoon?
  13. 您认为纳斯特为什么将漫画命名为“美国恒河”?通过将天主教符号与印度印度教徒神圣的河流联系起来,您认为漫画家希望人们如何看待美国天主教徒?
  14. Why do you think Nast titled the cartoon “The American River Ganges”? By connecting Catholic symbols with a river sacred to the Hindus in India, what do you think the cartoonist wanted people to think about American Catholics?

建议资源

Suggested Resources

http://www.loc.gov/teachers/classroommaterials/primarysourcesets/immigration/

http://www.loc.gov/teachers/classroommaterials/primarysourcesets/immigration/

这是由美国国会图书馆创建和维护的主要文档集“新美国人面临的移民挑战”的主页。除了音频和视频片段、照片和漫画等主要来源材料外,还提供教师材料。

This is the home page of a primary document set, “Immigration Challenges for New Americans,” created and maintained by the Library of Congress. In addition to primary source materials like audio and video footage, photographs, and cartoons, teacher materials are available as well.

http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/modules/immigration/index.cfm

http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/modules/immigration/index.cfm

斯蒂芬·明茨 (Stephen Mintz) 的数字历史网站上的此页面提供了一系列有关美国移民历史的资源。

This page from Stephen Mintz’s Digital History website offers a range of resources about the history of immigration to the United States.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/modsbook28.html

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/modsbook28.html

保罗·哈尔索尔 (Paul Halsall) 的《互联网现代史资料手册》中的此页面列出了关注美国各族裔移民的文档和网站链接。

This page from Paul Halsall’s Internet Modern History Sourcebook lists document and website links that focus on the American immigration of various ethnic groups.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_ century/harris.asp

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/harris.asp

阅读本杰明·哈里森在阿瓦隆项目上的就职演说,阿瓦隆项目是耶鲁大学法律和政治文件的在线档案馆。

Read Benjamin Harrison’s inaugural address at The Avalon Project, an online archive of legal and political documents housed at Yale University.

http://historymatters.gmu.edu/mse/sia/cartoon.htm

http://historymatters.gmu.edu/mse/sia/cartoon.htm

了解历史学家如何解读另一幅托马斯·纳斯特漫画,请访问 History Matters,这是一个由乔治梅森大学历史与新媒体中心开发和维护的网站。

See how a historian interprets another Thomas Nast cartoon at History Matters, a website developed and maintained by the Center for History and New Media at George Mason University.

http://cartoons.osu.edu/nast/portfolio.htm

http://cartoons.osu.edu/nast/portfolio.htm

在此由俄亥俄州立大学主办的网站上查找其他托马斯·纳斯特漫画。

Find other Thomas Nast cartoons on this site hosted by Ohio State University.

 

 


第 5 章

CHAPTER 5


电力和女性工作:谁真正受益?什么时候?

Electricity and Women’s Work: Who Really Benefited? And When?

图像

Theodor Horydczak,华盛顿电气学院的广告,1946 年 8 月 8 日。

可访问http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/today/sep30.html

Theodor Horydczak, advertisement of Electric Institute of Washington, August 8, 1946.

Available at http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/today/sep30.html

在 1921 年写给托马斯·爱迪生的信中,来自堪萨斯州的家庭主妇 WC Lathrop 夫人感谢发明家为她家提供了电力和省时的电器(参见来源 5.1 1她在堪萨斯州诺顿写道:

In a 1921 letter to Thomas Edison, Mrs. W. C. Lathrop, a housewife from Kansas, thanked the inventor for the electricity and time-saving appliances in her home (see Source 5.1).1 From Norton, Kansas, she wrote:

尊敬的先生,

Dear Sir,

亲自感谢使女性生活变得更加宜居的物品的发明者并不总是女性的特权……。我是一名大学毕业生,我的丈夫可能是托皮卡和丹佛之间最著名的外科医生之一…… [我们的]房子是用电照明的。我用西屋电灶做饭,用电动洗碗机洗碗。电风扇甚至有助于将热量分散到房子的一部分...... 我用电机洗衣服,用电动熨斗和电熨斗熨烫。我用电动吸尘器打扫房子。我休息、做电动按摩、用电熨斗卷发。穿着由电机驱动的机器缝制的长袍。然后打开留声机,要么学一会儿西班牙语,要么听克莱斯勒、格鲁克和加利的音乐……。请接受先生的谢意。爱迪生是一位最有鉴赏力的女性。我知道我只是对您怀有同样感激之情的众多人之一。

It is not always the privilege of a woman to thank personally the inventor of articles which make life liveable for her sex…. I am a college graduate and probably my husband is one of the best known surgeons between Topeka and Denver…. [Our] house is lighted by electricity. I cook on a Westinghouse electric range, wash dishes in an electric dish washer. An electric fan even helps to distribute the heat over part of the house…. I wash clothes in an electric machine and iron on an electric mangle and with an electric iron. I clean house with electric cleaners. I rest, take an electric massage and curl my hair on an electric iron. Dress in a gown sewed on a machine run by a motor. Then start the Victrola and either study Spanish for a while or listen to Kreisler and Gluck and Galli…. Please accept the thanks Mr. Edison of one most truly appreciative woman. I know I am only one of many under the same debt of gratitude to you.

我们最近观察了一群 11 年级的学生,他们仔细研究了这封信。拿着这封信,他们思考了这个问题:“爱迪生的发明如何改变了美国人的生活?” 学生们被莱斯罗普夫人的热情所吸引,纷纷议论道:“在各个方面”、“很多”、“他们让生活变得更轻松——尤其是对女性来说。” 拉斯罗普夫人生动的话语让学生们相信电力和电器改善了所有女性的生活,就像她们改善了她的生活一样。

We recently observed a class of 11th-graders who examined this letter. With this letter in hand, they pondered the question, “How did Edison’s inventions change American life?” Carried away by Mrs. Lathrop’s exuberance, students gushed, “In every way,” “A lot,” “They made life easier—especially for women.” The vividness of Mrs. Lathrop’s words led students to believe electricity and appliances had improved life for all women, just as they had for her.

直到老师问:“拉斯罗普夫人有多典型?从这封信中我们能说些什么呢?” 学生们是否从油嘴滑舌的第一印象转向真正的历史分析工作?人口普查数据和历史学家关于电气化、技术、家务和女性角色的研究都表明,拉斯罗普夫人并不是一位典型的 20 年代女性。她的家庭也不代表当时的大多数家庭。因此,对拉斯罗普夫人的典型性的调查成为关于社会阶级、地区差异、20年代生活以及从前工业化到工业化家务劳动的转变的一堂课。

Not until the teacher asked, “How typical was Mrs. Lathrop? How much can we say from this one letter?” did the students move from glib first impressions to begin the work of real historical analysis. Census data and historians’ work on electrification, technology, housework, and women’s roles all indicate that Mrs. Lathrop was not a typical 1920s woman. Nor did her household represent the majority of households of the time. Investigating the typicality of Mrs. Lathrop thus becomes a lesson in social class, regional differences, life in the 1920s, and the transition from pre-industrialized to industrialized housework.

我们需要做的第一件事是通过关注历史理解的两个核心方面来获取这份文档:时间和地点。那是 1921 年。莱斯罗普夫人提到的许多发明——缝纫机、洗碗机等等——都是前一年左右刚刚问世的。事实上,谁拥有这些设备?它们的分布范围有多广?其次,堪萨斯州诺顿到底在哪里?堪萨斯州显然位于美国腹地,但诺顿在哪里?它是威奇托或托皮卡等市区的郊区吗?或者它远离大城市,是 20 年代仍占美国人口大多数的乡村景观的一部分?

The first thing we need to do is source this document by focusing on two core aspects of historical understanding: time and place. The year is 1921. The many inventions Mrs. Lathrop mentions—sewing machine, dishwasher, and so on—had just come out the previous year or so. Who, in fact, owned these devices? How widespread were they? Second, where exactly is Norton, Kansas? Kansas is in the American heartland, obviously, but where is Norton? Is it a suburb of an urban area like Wichita or Topeka? Or is it distant from a big city, part of the rural landscape that still constituted a majority of the American population in the 1920s?

几年前,想要回答这些问题就意味着要花很长时间在图书馆的书架里,翻阅成堆的参考书,希望找到答案。但由于互联网的奇迹和易于使用的数据库的激增,任何具有高速连接的学生都可以回答这些问题。利用这些资源,我们可以很快了解到拉斯罗普夫人是多么的不寻常,以及将她的观点推广到 1920 年代的所有美国女性是多么危险。

Years ago, trying to answer these questions would have meant long hours spent in the stacks of a library, hunting through piles of reference books hoping to find answers. But thanks to the wonders of the Internet and the proliferation of easy-to-use databases, these questions can be answered by any student with a high-speed connection. Drawing on these resources, we can quickly get an idea of just how unusual Mrs. Lathrop was, and just how perilous it is to generalize from her to all American women in the 1920s.

使用谷歌地图(http://maps.google.com),我们可以很快看到堪萨斯州诺顿位于西北部堪萨斯州一角,内布拉斯加州边境以南,远离主要人口中心——距离托皮卡 290 英里,距离堪萨斯城 350 英里,距离威奇托 270 英里,距离丹佛 310 英里。查看弗吉尼亚大学图书馆网站 ( http://mapserver.lib.virginia.edu ) 上的 1920 年联邦人口普查,我们可以了解有关拉斯罗普家乡的更多信息。通过指定堪萨斯州,我们了解到,1920 年,诺顿县占该州 1,769,257 名人口中的 11,423 名堪萨斯人(或不到 1%)。事实上,人口普查显示诺顿县每平方英里有 130 人,就人口密度而言,该县在该州各县中排名垫底。1921 年,拉斯罗普夫人给托马斯·爱迪生写信时,她似乎生活在一个相当乡村的地区。

Using Google Maps (http://maps.google.com), we can quickly see that Norton, Kansas, is in the northwest corner of Kansas, just south of the Nebraska border and far from major population centers—290 miles from Topeka, 350 from Kansas City, 270 from Wichita, and 310 from Denver. A look at the 1920 Federal census at the University of Virginia library’s website (http://mapserver.lib.virginia.edu) gives us more information about Lathrop’s hometown. By specifying Kansas, we learn that in 1920, Norton County accounted for 11,423 Kansans out of a state population of 1,769,257 (or less than 1%). Indeed, the census shows that Norton County had 130 people per square mile, putting it in the bottom half of the state’s counties in terms of population density. Mrs. Lathrop, it appears, lived in a fairly rural region when she wrote to Thomas Edison in 1921.

与农村同龄人相比,拉斯罗普夫人在 1921 年就已经通电了,这一事实是极不寻常的。美国技术历史学家戴维·奈 (David Nye) 指出,1935 年(莱斯罗普夫人写信14 年后),堪萨斯州只有 5% 到 15% 的农村地区通了电;大多数通电的农村地区位于东北部或远西部。2研究 20 世纪南方经济发展的历史学家克莱顿·布朗 (Clayton Brown) 引用了 1920 年的联邦人口普查,显示在 600 万个农场中,只有 452,620 个农场(不到 8%)拥有电灯,只有 643,899 个农场(约占 10%)拥有自来水。3 Brown 的结论是,大部分进步发生在新英格兰和远西部:“中西部和南部排名最低,从 10% 到不到 1%。” 4直到 20 世纪 30 年代的新政之后,大多数农村地区才实现了电气化。

Compared to her rural peers, the fact that Mrs. Lathrop even had electricity in 1921 was highly unusual. David Nye, a historian of American technology, notes that in 1935 (14 years after Mrs. Lathrop wrote her letter) only 5 to 15% of rural Kansas had electricity; most rural areas with electricity lay in the Northeast or Far West.2 Clayton Brown, a historian of 20th-century Southern economic development, cites a 1920 Federal census showing that of 6 million farms, only 452,620 (less than 8%) had electric lights and only 643,899, roughly 10%, possessed running water.3 Brown concludes that most of these advancements took place in New England and the Far West: “The Midwest and South ranked lowest, ranging from 10 percent to less than 1 percent.”4 Electrification didn’t come to most rural areas until the New Deal of the 1930s.

与拉斯罗普不同的是,大多数农村妇女为了维持家庭运转而忍受着繁重的工作。洗衣服尤其令人厌恶。5历史学家 Susan Strasser 根据家庭经济学家 Catharine Beecher (1841) 和 Helen Campbell (1881) 的论文进行了描述。

In contrast to Lathrop, most rural women endured backbreaking work to keep their households running. Doing laundry was particularly odious.5 Historian Susan Strasser gives a description based on the treatises of home economists Catharine Beecher (1841) and Helen Campbell (1881).

在没有自来水、煤气或电力的情况下,即使是最简单的手工洗衣过程也会消耗大量的时间和劳动力。一次洗涤、一次煮沸和一次漂洗使用了大约五十加仑的水(或四百磅),这些水必须从泵、水井或水龙头转移到炉子和浴缸,装在桶和洗涤锅炉中,重量可能高达四十或四十磅。五十磅。摩擦、拧干和提起沾满水的衣服和床单,包括床单、桌布和男士厚重工作服等大型物品,使女性的手臂和手腕疲惫不堪,并使她们接触腐蚀性物质。他们把装满湿衣服的沉重的桶和篮子拖到外面,拿起每件物品,把它挂在绳子上,然后回来把它们全部拿下来;他们通过在炉子上加热几个熨斗并在冷却时交替使用来熨烫,6

Without running water, gas, or electricity, even the most simplified hand-laundry process consumed staggering amounts of time and labor. One wash, one boiling, and one rinse used about fifty gallons of water—or four hundred pounds—which had to be moved from pump or well or faucet to stove and tub, in buckets and wash boilers that might weigh as much as forty or fifty pounds. Rubbing, wringing, and lifting water-laden clothes and linens, including large articles like sheets, tablecloths, and men’s heavy work clothes, wearied women’s arms and wrists and exposed them to caustic substances. They lugged weighty tubs and baskets full of wet laundry outside, picked up each article, hung it on the line, and returned to take it all down; they ironed by heating several irons on the stove and alternating them as they cooled, never straying far from the hot stove.6

布朗的工作支持了这些分析。1919 年,美国农业部 (USDA) 报告称,“农村家庭每周花费 10 多个小时抽水并将其从水源运送到厨房。” 7布朗认为,“农妇每年洗衣服的时间比城里使用电动洗衣机的妇女多二十天。” 8美国传记作家罗伯特·卡罗 (Robert Caro) 在林登·约翰逊 (Lyndon B. Johnson) 的传记中描述了在 1938 年林登·约翰逊 (Lyndon B. Johnson) 精心策划在该地区出现电力之前,在距诺顿以南仅 816 英里的得克萨斯州乡村山区洗衣服的密集劳动。参见来源 5.5)。9

Brown’s work supports these analyses. In 1919, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) reported that “rural families spent over 10 hours per week pumping water and carrying it from source to kitchen.”7 Brown contends, “Farmwives spent twenty days more per year washing clothes than women in the city using electric washers.”8 In his biography of Lyndon B. Johnson, American biographer Robert Caro describes the intensive labor involved in doing laundry in the rural hill country of Texas—just 816 miles south of Norton—before LBJ orchestrated the advent of electricity in the region in 1938 (see Source 5.5).9

直到电线和室内管道延伸到人们的家中并且人们购买了洗衣机之前,几代人以来洗衣服的过程基本上没有变化。1921 年,拉斯罗普夫人在美国农村使用电动洗衣机、吸尘器、熨斗和电灯,这并不代表她农村同龄人的经历。尽管到 1930 年,大多数城市居民都拥有了此类便利,但农民家庭要过很多年才能利用家庭技术的类似优势。10

The process of doing laundry was largely unchanged across generations until electrical lines and indoor plumbing were extended to people’s homes and people purchased washing machines. Mrs. Lathrop’s use of an electric washing machine, vacuum cleaner, iron, and electric lights in rural America in 1921 did not represent the experiences of her rural peers. Although by 1930 most urban dwellers had such conveniences, it would be years before farm families could take similar advantage of household technology.10

如果拉斯罗普夫人可以在美国乡村享受到这样的便利,为什么其他人不能呢?使用洗衣机需要室内管道和冷热水。首先,你需要钱来购买电器、支付水电费、给房子布线以及连接电线。电力公司没有动力将线路延伸到只有少数人可以利用的农村地区。大多数农村居民太穷,无力支付电器或日常用电费用(见来源 5.3)。奈指出,到 20 年代末,有 10% 的美国农民拥有配电线路,他们为接入电网支付了城市电费的两倍。11如果说 1921 年,拉斯罗普在堪萨斯州的农村地区通了电,而其他人却没有,那是因为她处于一个罕见的地位。她很有钱!

If Mrs. Lathrop could enjoy such amenities in rural America, why couldn’t others? Using a washing machine required indoor plumbing, and hot and cold running water. And you needed the money to buy the appliance in the first place, pay utility bills, wire the house, and bring electrical lines to it. Power companies had no incentive to extend lines to rural areas where only small numbers could tap into them. Most rural residents were too poor to pay for appliances or daily electricity (see Source 5.3). Nye stipulates that the 10% of American farmers who had distribution lines to their homes by the end of the 1920s had paid double the urban rate to get connected to the grid.11 If Lathrop had electricity in rural Kansas in 1921 while others didn’t, it is because she was in a rare position. She was rich!

拉斯罗普夫人的农村同龄人必须等到新政才有望获得电力。1938 年开始,农村电气化管理局 (REA) 向农民合作社提供资金、设备和专业知识。一年后,四分之一的农场有了电力服务。12第二次世界大战放慢了步伐;到 1944 年,只有 45% 的美国农场获得了电力。13相比之下,在商业和公民利益的推动下,电力迅速进入城市。城市居民受益于连接企业和工厂的线路,而郊区居民则利用连接他们与市中心的电车线路。

Mrs. Lathrop’s rural peers had to wait until the New Deal before they could hope for electricity. Begun in 1938, the Rural Electrification Administration (REA) lent money, equipment, and expertise to farmers’ cooperatives. A year later, a quarter of all farms had electrical service.12 World War II slowed the pace; only 45% of U.S. farms had received electricity by 1944.13 In contrast, spurred by business and civic interests, electricity came quickly to cities. Urban dwellers benefited from lines that connected businesses and factories, while suburban residents took advantage of electrical trolley lines connecting them to city centers.

拉斯罗普夫人的家与大多数农村家庭的鲜明对比,凸显了她的上流社会背景。鉴于 1920 年 35% 的美国家庭拥有电力,拉斯罗普夫人享有比大多数美国人更高的生活水平。14这些新型电气设备的主要受益者是富人。历史学家露丝·施瓦茨·考恩 (Ruth Schwartz Cowen) 发现,在美国 36 个城市的富裕家庭中,80%1926 年,美国拥有吸尘器和洗衣机。15 1921 年,电灶和洗衣机在上层阶级家庭中更为常见。16 1935 年,印第安纳州曼西 60% 的家庭拥有燃气灶或电灶,50% 的家庭拥有燃气灶或电灶。一个吸尘机。17 Lathrop 女士14 年前在农村地区拥有两台电器(与来源 5.2相比)。18

The sharp contrast between Mrs. Lathrop’s home and the majority of rural households shines a light on her upper-class background. Given that 35% of all American households had electricity in 1920, Mrs. Lathrop enjoyed a higher standard of living than most Americans.14 The chief beneficiaries of these new electrified gadgets were the wealthy. Historian Ruth Schwartz Cowen found that of the affluent households in 36 American cities, 80% had vacuum cleaners and washing machines in 1926.15 Electric ranges and washing machines were more often found in upper-class homes in 1921.16 In 1935, 60% of families in Muncie, Indiana, owned a gas or electric range and 50% had a vacuum cleaner.17 Mrs. Lathrop had both appliances in a rural area 14 years earlier (compare with Source 5.2).18

1921 年,一位富裕女性的生活是什么样的?拉斯罗普夫人的信表明她工作并不是为了维持生计。她提到了自己担任妇女俱乐部区官员、镇组织主席和女主人的角色。考恩认为,这些是这个时代的上层阶级家庭主妇可能从事的活动。19

What was life like for a woman of means in 1921? Mrs. Lathrop’s letter indicates that she didn’t work to make ends meet. She mentions her roles as officer in the District of Women’s Club, President of the Town Organization, and hostess. According to Cowen, these are the kinds of activities that an upper-class housewife of this era might have engaged in.19

但变化正在发生。在某些情况下,新的节省时间的设备意味着富有的女性要做更多而不是更少的家务活。这怎么可能?从1900年到1920年,生活水平较高的女性很可能需要家政服务来完成家务,例如洗衣服、熨烫衣服或打扫房间——涉及如此繁重体力的工作对这个阶层的女性来说被认为是有辱人格的。20拉斯罗普夫人关于“几乎所有工作都是我自己做”的说法21表明她可能需要家庭帮助。然而,从1920年到1940年,随着电器拥有量的增加,上层阶级家庭主妇在家里得到的帮助越来越少。即使是文雅的女士也可以毫不费力地使用洗衣机和吸尘器。22与世纪之交相比,“这一代普通舒适的家庭主妇学会了在没有仆人协助的情况下组织家务,或者比她母亲所需要的协助时间少得多。” 23

But changes were afoot. In some cases, new time-saving devices meant that rich women were doing more housework rather than less. How is that possible? From 1900 to 1920, a woman with a high standard of living most likely had domestic help to complete housework such as washing and ironing laundry or cleaning rooms—tasks involving such heavy labor were considered demeaning for women of this class.20 Mrs. Lathrop’s statement about “doing practically all my own work”21 suggests that she may have had domestic help. However, from 1920 to 1940, upper-class housewives had less and less help in the home as ownership of electric appliances grew. Even genteel ladies could use a washing machine and vacuum cleaner without much toil.22 Compared to the turn of the century, “the average comfortable housewife of this generation learned to organize the work in her household without the assistance of servants or with far fewer hours of assistance than her mother had had.”23

拉斯罗普夫人在另一个重要方面与她的同龄人有所不同:她是一名大学毕业生。正如教育史学家 Patricia Albjerg Graham 指出的那样,在世纪之交很少有人上过大学——1920 年,“传统大学年龄段”的男性和女性中只有 8% 上过大学。24 1900-10 年,当莱斯罗普夫人可能出席时,这一数字仅为 4-5%。25这些学生来自“比一般人口更富有、社会地位更高”的家庭。26 1837 年,欧柏林学院成为美国第一所向女性开放的大学。到 1910 年,女性几乎占本科生人数的 40%。27到 1920 年,拉斯罗普夫人写下《爱迪生》时,共有 34% 的美国女性获得了学士学位或专业学位。28历史学家芭芭拉·所罗门 (Barbara Solomon) 指出,虽然大多数大学女性都结婚了,但她们结婚的人数少于未上大学的女性,而且结婚的年龄也较晚。29许多已婚毕业生专注于家务和志愿工作,而不是职业。1920 年,只有 9% 的美国女性在外面工作,比 1900 年增加了 3.4%。30莱斯罗普夫人上过大学,这一点很不寻常,但她将自己的学位用于志愿服务和家务工作而不是职业,这是相当典型的。

Mrs. Lathrop was different from her peers in another crucial way: she was a college graduate. As historian of education Patricia Albjerg Graham notes, few people attended college at the turn of the century—in 1920, only 8% of men and women from the “traditional college age group” attended college.24 In 1900–10, when Mrs. Lathrop likely attended, that figure was only 4–5%.25 These students came from families with “greater wealth and higher social status than the population at large.”26 In 1837, Oberlin was the first college in the United States to open its doors to women. By 1910, women made up almost 40% of the undergraduate population.27 By 1920, when Mrs. Lathrop wrote Edison, a total of 34% of American women had received a bachelor’s degree or professional degree.28 Historian Barbara Solomon notes that while most college women married, they did so in fewer numbers than those who didn’t attend college, and at a later age.29 Many married graduates focused on domestic duties and volunteer work rather than a career. In 1920, only 9% of American women worked outside the home, up 3.4% from 1900.30 Mrs. Lathrop was unusual for having gone to college, but fairly typical in using her degree for volunteer and domestic work rather than a profession.

拉斯罗普夫人还代表什么?她无疑代表了电力和家用电器改变女性工作性质后女性的积极反应。居民对阿拉巴马州早期农村电气化试验的反应极为积极。D. Clayton Brown 报告说:“电力对于减轻家务负担的影响最大。妻子们表示,摆脱苦差事后最珍贵的解脱是免于挑水和照顾煤油灯。参与者将更多时间投入到夜间活动,例如阅读和听广播。” 31 1939 年及以后,当更多农村居民用上电时,反应也类似。32照明、休闲时间,以及从取水、做饭、洗澡和洗衣的艰苦劳作中解脱出来,这些都是农村家庭受欢迎的变化。

What else does Mrs. Lathrop represent? She certainly represents the positive reaction of women once electricity and household appliances changed the nature of women’s work. Residents’ reactions to an early Alabama experiment in rural electrification were overwhelmingly positive. D. Clayton Brown reports, “Electricity had [the] greatest impact in easing the burden of keeping house. Wives mentioned freedom from carrying water and caring for kerosene lamps as their most prized releases from drudgery. Participants devoted more time to evening activities such as reading and listening to the radio.”31 When electricity reached more rural residents in 1939 and beyond, reactions were similar.32 Lighting, time for leisure, and a break from the grueling toil of fetching water for drinking, cooking, bathing, and laundry were all welcome changes in rural homes.

一旦新技术进入拉斯罗普夫人的家,她的生活是否变得更加“宜居”?她真的“休息好并准备好在一天结束时服务”她的丈夫了吗?尽管学者们一致认为电力减少了繁重的劳动,但一些人指出它对妇女在家庭中的角色产生了意想不到的后果。电力和电器的影响比拉斯罗普的信或人们的直接反应可能暗示的更大、更多样化(参见来源 5.4)。历史学家考恩和斯特拉瑟认为,妇女的工作正处于根本性的变化之中,其影响尚未完全实现。

Was life more “livable” for Mrs. Lathrop once the new technology entered her home? Was she truly “rested and ready to serve” her husband at the end of the day? Though scholars agree that electricity reduced backbreaking labor, several point to unexpected consequences it had on women’s role in the home. The impact of electricity and appliances was greater and more varied than either Lathrop’s letter or people’s immediate reactions might suggest (see Source 5.4). Historians Cowen and Strasser argue that women’s work was in the midst of fundamental changes, and the ramifications had not yet been fully realized.

拉斯罗普夫人的信表明,1900 年代的家庭不再是生产单位,而是成为消费单位。对于露丝·施瓦茨·考恩(Ruth Schwartz Cowen)来说,这个概念具有误导性,因为它表明女性由于技术变革而获得了新的休闲时间。考恩认为,电力只是改变了家务劳动的性质。它并没有消除它。现在,清洁标准的提高增加了女性需要完成的家务劳动量。由于技术使任务变得更容易,因此人们期望更频繁地完成任务。尽管真空吸尘器使清洁地毯变得更加容易,但现在人们希望女性每周用吸尘器吸尘一次,这样家里就没有灰尘了,而不是每年清洁地毯几次而不用担心灰尘。新的清洁标准也适用于洗衣房。而且由于新技术使此类任务看起来很容易,因此人们预计会更频繁地完成这些任务。斯特拉瑟解释说,

Mrs. Lathrop’s letter suggests that households in the 1900s were no longer units of production, but had become units of consumption. For Ruth Schwartz Cowen this notion is misleading, as it suggests that women had gained new leisure time as a result of technological changes. Cowen argues that electricity only changed the nature of housework; it didn’t eliminate it. Rising standards of cleanliness now added to the amount of housework women were expected to complete. Because technology made tasks easier, they were expected to be done more often. Although vacuum cleaners made cleaning rugs much easier, women were now expected to vacuum weekly and have no dust in the home rather than clean the rugs a few times per year and not worry about the dust. New standards of cleanliness applied to laundry as well. And because new technology made such tasks seem easy, they were expected to be done more often. Strasser explains,

从长远来看,自动洗衣机可能会进行重组,而不是减少洗衣时间……。在这些机器以及它们所使用的洗涤剂、织物柔软剂、漂白剂和静电消除剂广告的鼓励下,美国人开始更快地决定在篮子里扔什么。没有哪个单独的洗衣量会像手工洗衣服那样造成如此多的疲劳或花费如此多的时间……。但它改变了洗衣方式堆积物从每周的噩梦变成了无休止的任务,增加了堆积物的大小,增加了大多数家庭使用的水、燃料和洗衣产品的量,甚至可能增加了家庭主妇的工作时间,现在工作时间分散在一周内。33

Over the long run, the automatic washer probably restructured rather than reduced laundry time…. Encouraged by advertisements for these machines and for the detergents, fabric softeners, bleaches, and static reducers they used, Americans began to make quicker decisions about what to throw in the hamper. No individual laundry load caused as much fatigue or took as much time as hand-done laundry…. But it changed the laundry pile from a weekly nightmare to an unending task, increasing the size of the pile, the amount of water and fuel and laundry products most households used, and possibly even the housewife’s working time, which was now spread out over the week.33

移民减少、战争爆发、经济萧条以及有关妇女角色的意识形态的兴起导致家庭雇用的仆人数量急剧下降。34同时,将某些任务带回家(洗涤和熨烫衣物、清洁地毯)会占用新设备所节省的时间。正如考恩解释的那样,

Decreasing immigration, the onset of war, economic depression, and emerging ideology about women’s roles led to a sharp decline in the number of servants employed by households.34 At the same time, returning certain tasks to the home (washing and ironing laundry, carpet cleaning) filled any time gained by the new equipment. As Cowen explains,

拥有本迪克斯的女人会发现洗衣服更容易,但同时,她会比她的母亲或祖母洗更多的衣服,而且自己洗的衣服也更多。35

The woman endowed with a Bendix would have found it easier to do her laundry but, simultaneously, would have done more laundry, and more of it herself, than either her mother or her grandmother had.35

在早期,像洗衣这样的工作被认为对上层阶级女性来说过于劳动密集或有辱人格。一旦新技术减轻了苦差事,所有女性都可以接受从事这种工作。36最终的结果是,美国女性比以往任何时候都更多地参与家务劳动。节省下来的劳动力是雇佣工人的,而不是他们自己的。37

In earlier times, tasks like laundry were deemed too labor-intensive or demeaning for upper-class women. Once the new technology eased the drudgery, it became acceptable for all women to do this kind of work.36 The net effect was that American women were more engaged in housework than ever. The labor saved was hired workers’, not their own.37

当考恩检查 20 年代和 1930 年代富裕家庭主妇的时间研究时,她发现花在家务上的平均时间没有明显变化。38妇女的阶级背景再次反映了电力和技术对家务劳动的影响。直到 1939 年左右,没有收入的农村妇女才出现了变化。大多数人直到战后才会经历重大变化。直到那时,工薪阶层女性才感受到技术的推动,让家务劳动变得不再那么辛苦。

When Cowen examined time studies of affluent housewives in the 1920s and 1930s, she found that the average time spent on housework did not change markedly.38 Again, women’s class background reflected the impact of electricity and technology on housework. Rural women without means saw no change until about 1939; most would not experience major changes until after the war. Only then did working-class women feel a boost from technology that made housework less laborious.

在拉斯罗普夫人写作期间,城市中的贫困和中产阶级女性的生活水平可能有所提高。这些妇女的工资往往超出了她们的家务劳动,并且不太可能付钱给其他人来完成基本的家务劳动。但即使新技术、自来水和电力有了显着的进步,清洁标准的提高以及将家庭生活和女性气质联系起来的意识形态也给所有女性带来了额外的压力。

Urban women of the poorer and middle classes probably experienced an improved standard of living around the time Mrs. Lathrop wrote. These women often earned wages beyond their housework, and would have been less likely to pay others to complete basic household tasks. But even as new technology, running water, and electricity were notable improvements, increasing standards of cleanliness and an ideology that linked domesticity and womanhood put additional pressure on all women.

考恩认为,随着女性在家庭中的角色变得更加固定,无论阶级如何,女性变得更加孤立。自工业时代开始以来,与前工业时代相比,妇女与丈夫和孩子一起工作的情况减少了。随着电力的出现,这种趋势仍在继续。过去男人和孩子们执行的任务(砍伐和拖运木头用于火炉)现在已经过时了。这解放了男人的时间,使他们能够在家庭之外找到工作。因工业化而解放的儿童开始上学或从事赚取工资的劳动。与此同时,清洁和做饭等任务仍然存在,并且落在了女性身上。39因此,一些历史学家认为,尽管电力和家庭技术的直接影响是惊人的,但从长远来看,它们只是重新安排而不是减少家务劳动。对于许多女性来说,其后果并不像拉斯罗普夫人的信中让我们相信的那么积极。

Cowen argues that as their roles became more fixed in the home, regardless of class, women became more isolated. Since the onset of the industrial age, women had worked less alongside their husbands and children than in pre-industrial times. With the advent of electricity, this trend continued. The tasks men and children used to perform (cutting and hauling wood for stoves) were now obsolete. This freed men’s time and enabled them to find work outside the home. Children, freed by industrialization, spent time at school or wage-earning labor. Meanwhile, tasks like cleaning and cooking remained—and they fell to women.39 Thus, some historians argue that even though the immediate impact of electricity and household technology was stunning, in the long run, they simply rearranged, rather than reduced, housework. And for many women, the consequences were not nearly as positive as Mrs. Lathrop’s letter would have us believe.

通过将这一封信与一系列来源进行比较,我们可以在她的历史背景下欣赏拉斯罗普夫人,并更好地理解那个时期和个人来源。了解拉斯罗普夫人让我们考虑地区和阶级差异。要看到拉斯罗普夫人与 20 世纪 20 年代其他女性的相似之处和不同之处,必须有更广泛的背景。我们倾向于将技术变革视为进步,而没有充分考虑它们如何影响不同群体。尽管拉斯罗普夫人对她的新技术感到兴奋,但随着时间的推移,这意味着她可能需要比以前做更多的家务活。相比之下,1921 年尚未获得权力的贫困妇女和农村妇女可能受益最多,因为她们总是自己做家务。不管,新技术对女性工作的改变比拉斯罗普夫人的信中所表明的更为深刻。她的信是了解一个时代的一扇窗户,但仅此而已。我们可以看到一扇窗户所允许的尽可能多的东西。但越过这个窗口,是一个更广阔、更复杂的世界,无法轻易概括。拉斯罗普夫人的故事和随附的资料可帮助我们的学生应对这些复杂的问题。

In comparing this one letter to a range of sources, we can appreciate Mrs. Lathrop in her historical context, and better understand both the period and the individual source. Understanding Mrs. Lathrop makes us consider regional and class differences. This broader context is necessary to see Mrs. Lathrop as both similar to and different from other women in the 1920s. We tend to think of the technological changes as improvements without fully considering how they affected different groups. Though Mrs. Lathrop was thrilled with her new technology, over time it meant she probably had to do more housework than before. In contrast, the poor and rural women who were yet to receive power in 1921 likely benefited the most, given that they had always done their own housework. Regardless, the new technology altered women’s work in more profound ways than Mrs. Lathrop’s letter indicates. Her letter is a window on an era, but only that. We can see just as much as that one window allows. But beyond that window is a broader, more complex world that resists facile generalizations. Mrs. Lathrop’s story and the accompanying sources help our students navigate these complexities.

为什么要讲述莱斯罗普夫人的故事?

Why Teach About Mrs. Lathrop?

代表性:我们可以从一封信中学到多少?当学生们第一次读到拉斯罗普夫人写给托马斯·爱迪生的信时,许多人得出结论,电力在 1921 年对每个人产生了积极的影响。他们根据拉斯罗普夫人的印象,假设当时所有人对电气化和新电器都有同样的反应。概括的倾向是自然的,但这样做时,学生们错过了那个时期的复杂性,错过了电力和新技术的长期影响。

Representativeness: How Much Can We Learn from One Letter? When students first read Mrs. Lathrop’s letter to Thomas Edison, many conclude that electricity positively influenced everyone in 1921. They take Mrs. Lathrop’s impressions and assume that all people at this time had the same reaction to electrification and new appliances. The tendency to generalize is natural, but in doing so, students miss the complexities of the time period and miss the long-range impact of electricity and new technology.

社会心理学家谈论“生动效应”,其中数据的色彩和即时性会扭曲我们对典型性和代表性的判断。可以肯定的是,拉斯罗普夫人的信生动地展示了她的生活——作为一个来源,它富有表现力和令人难忘,而且考虑到爱迪生在顶部的手写注释,它具有很少有二手来源所共有的真实性。

Social psychologists talk about a “vividness effect” in which the color and immediacy of data skew our judgments of typicality and representativeness. To be sure, Mrs. Lathrop’s letter provides a vivid peek inside her life—as a source, it is expressive and memorable, and given Edison’s handwritten note at the top, it possesses an authenticity shared by few secondary sources.

但这封信吸引我们的特质却可能使我们误入歧途。拉斯罗普夫人的信讲述了爱迪生的发明如何改变了一位受过教育的特权女性的生活,她在 1921 年拥有了大多数美国人直到很久以后才拥有的电器。

But the very qualities that attract us to this letter can lead us astray. Mrs. Lathrop’s letter tells how Edison’s inventions transformed the life of an educated woman of privilege who in 1921 owned appliances that most Americans did not own until much later.

毫无疑问,爱迪生的发明改变了拉斯罗普的生活。但这些发明还需要很多年才能普及到普通美国人,特别是在农村地区。将莱斯罗普夫人的信与其他文件和数据来源相佐证,可以促使学生更加批判性地阅读,并将莱斯罗普夫人的经历置于历史背景中。一旦他们开始将拉斯罗普夫人的经历视为众多经历之一,他们就会对那个时期、女性历史和技术有了更复杂的看法。一封信告诉我们有关拉斯罗普夫人的事;它没有告诉我们整个国家的情况。

No doubt Edison’s inventions transformed Lathrop’s life. But it would be many years before these inventions would reach the average American, particularly in rural areas. Corroborating Mrs. Lathrop’s letter with other documents and data sources pushes students to read more critically and place Mrs. Lathrop’s experience into historical context. Once they begin to see Mrs. Lathrop’s experience as one of many, they gain a more complex view of the time period, women’s history, and technology. One letter tells us about Mrs. Lathrop; it does not tell us about the country as a whole.

观点:比较历史观点。我们倾向于将历史变迁视为从不太开明的国家到先进国家的进步。美国历史教科书支持这样一种观念,即美国的故事是一个永无休止的进步的故事:随着每一次事件的发生,我们都离建国时设定的理想更近了一步。事实上,历史变迁对人们的影响是不同的。将历史变迁描述为完全是好是坏把问题过于简单化了。生活更加复杂。

Point of View: Comparing Historical Perspectives. We tend to view historical change as progress from a less enlightened state to an advanced state. U.S. history textbooks support the notion that the American story is one of unending progress: With each event we move closer to the ideals set out in the founding of this nation. In reality, historical changes affect people differently. Portraying historical change as completely good or bad oversimplifies the matter. Life is more complicated.

要了解任何技术的影响,我们必须问:谁受益?当学生们证实历史资料时,他们的目光超越了拉斯罗普夫人,并瞥见了 1920 年代其他女性的经历。多种历史视角可以让学生更全面地了解历史,帮助学生看到复杂的因果关系。

To understand the impact of any technology, we must ask: Who benefits? As students corroborate historical sources, they see beyond Mrs. Lathrop and gain a glimpse of other women’s experiences in the 1920s. Multiple historical perspectives can give a more complete view of history and help students see complex cause-effect relationships.

历史证据:使用数字数据和互联网来了解过去。本课程不仅为学生提供了阅读书面文档的机会,还为学生提供了使用数字数据和互联网的机会。通过简单的网络搜索和阅读随附的历史资料,学生们会遇到统计数据,使他们能够将拉斯罗普与她的同时代人进行比较。由于历史记录不完整——我们不知道 1921 年堪萨斯州诺顿到底谁有和没有电力和电器——本课使用费城和农村农场等地的数据来研究城市和农村之间的差异地区。从不完整的数据中得出结论总是需要进行推理。但疯狂的猜测和有根据的猜测之间存在很大差异。

Historical Evidence: Using Numerical Data and the Internet to Understand the Past. This lesson not only gives students the chance to read written documents, but also presents an opportunity to use numerical data and the Internet. Through simple web searches and reading accompanying historical sources, students encounter statistical data that allow them to compare Lathrop to her contemporaries. Because the historical record is incomplete—we don’t know exactly who had and didn’t have electricity and appliances in Norton, Kansas, in 1921—this lesson uses data from places like Philadelphia and rural farms to study the difference between urban and rural areas. Drawing conclusions from incomplete data always involves making inferences. But there is a big difference between a wild guess and an educated one. This lesson gives students the opportunity to engage with new forms of evidence and teaches them to be tentative in the conclusions they draw.

您将如何使用这些材料?

How Might You Use These Materials?

场景 1(1-2 小时课程)。拉斯罗普夫人在 20 年代女性中的代表性如何?使用这些来源和工具让学生阅读和分析多个来源,并就她的代表性提出基于证据的论点。

Scenario 1 (1–2 Hour Lesson). How representative was Mrs. Lathrop of women in the 1920s? Use these sources and tools to engage students in reading and analyzing multiple sources and creating an evidence-based argument about her representativeness.


CCSS

#1、#7

CCSS

#1, #7


与学生一起阅读 Lathrop 夫人的信(来源 5.1),并询问这封信告诉了他们关于 20 年代女性的哪些信息。使用工具 5.1帮助学生将拉斯罗普夫人置于此时美国女性的更广阔的视野中。使用工具5.1在该课程中,学生将使用万维网来检查 Lathrop 夫人来自的地区,并访问弗吉尼亚大学在线图书馆数据库中的 1920 年人口普查数据。我们建议让学生结对或小组合作,以鼓励对发现的讨论,并为学生提供互相帮助的机会。在查阅了各种资源并阅读了莱斯罗普夫人的信后,学生们被要求对莱斯罗普的代表性进行论证。这是全班讨论的良好起点。讨论结束后,要求学生写一篇简短的文章,给出他们的结论并提供支持证据。

Read Mrs. Lathrop’s letter (Source 5.1) with students and ask what it tells them about women in the 1920s. Use Tool 5.1 to help students set Mrs. Lathrop into a broader picture of American women at this time. Using Tool 5.1, students will use the World Wide Web to examine the region Mrs. Lathrop came from and access 1920 Census data at the University of Virginia’s online library database. We suggest having students work in pairs or groups to encourage discussion of discoveries and to give students opportunities to help each other. After consulting various resources and reading Mrs. Lathrop’s letter, students are then asked to make an argument about Lathrop’s representativeness. This is a good starting point for a whole-class discussion. Following the discussion, ask students to write a brief essay giving their conclusions with supporting evidence.

学生可以通过阅读资料来源 5.25.3继续这一探究,其中提供了一个城市地区的统计数据以及当时美国农村的概况。工具 5.2帮助学生利用这些新资料来探索 Lathrop 夫人在 1920 年代美国更广泛的形象中的典型性。资料来源引导学生不仅要考虑地区差异,还要考虑阶级差异。在课程结束时,讨论学生对莱斯罗普夫人的看法。要求学生引用证据来支持他们的结论。将这些回应与之前的回应(工具 5.1末尾)进行比较,看看证据如何以及是否改变了他们的结论。讨论结束后,要求学生写下工具 5.2底部问题 8 的修订结论。学生应该使用来源证据来解释他们的结论是否发生了变化以及原因。

Students can continue this inquiry by reading Sources 5.2 and 5.3, which give statistics for one urban area and an overview of rural America at the time. Tool 5.2 helps students use these new sources to explore Mrs. Lathrop’s typicality against a much broader portrait of the United States in the 1920s. The sources direct students to consider not only regional differences but class differences, too. At the end of the lesson, discuss students’ ideas about Mrs. Lathrop. Ask students to cite evidence to support their conclusions. Compare these responses to earlier ones (at the end of Tool 5.1) and see how and if the evidence has altered their conclusions. After the discussion, ask students to write a revised conclusion to Question 8 at the bottom of Tool 5.2. Students should use evidence from the sources to explain whether their conclusions have changed and why.

图像


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 证实消息来源
  • Corroborating sources
  • 情境化来源
  • Contextualizing sources
  • 询问来源以确定代表性
  • Questioning sources to identify representativeness
  • 基于证据的思考和论证
  • Evidence-based thinking and argumentation
  • 视角识别
  • Perspective recognition

场景 2(1-2 小时课程)。电力和新技术如何影响 20 年代的人们?使用这些材料让学生参与阅读和分析,以就 20 年代技术的影响提出基于证据的论点。

Scenario 2 (1–2 Hour Lesson). How did electricity and new technology influence people in the 1920s? Use these materials to engage students in reading and analysis to create an evidence-based argument about the impact of technology in the 1920s.


CCSS

9–10 #6

#9

CCSS

9–10 #6

#9


要求学生在开始本课之前重读 Lathrop 夫人的信(来源 5.1 ),或完成场景 1,然后继续本课,其中结合了来源 5.45.5以及工具 5.3考虑 20 年代电力的影响,学生思考电力对不同背景的妇女的影响。

Ask students to reread Mrs. Lathrop’s letter (Source 5.1) before starting this lesson, or complete Scenario 1 and then move on to this lesson, which combines Sources 5.4 and 5.5 with Tool 5.3 to consider the effects of electricity in the 1920s as students ponder the impact of electricity on women from different backgrounds.

从拉斯罗普夫人的信开始。以班级或小组的形式,按照拉斯罗普夫人信中的报告,制定一份日常生活时间表。让学生列出信中表明拉斯罗普对她的生活的感受的单词和短语。让学生阅读资料来源 5.45.5,比较富裕妇女与农村贫困妇女的洗衣任务。让学生想象不同的家庭主妇会如何描述她们的生活。学生将使用什么证据来构建这些图像?使用维恩图,要求学生与搭档一起对比上流社会女性在通电前后的生活。这将使学生感受到一个社会阶层的变化和连续性,以及电力改变他们家务劳动的方式。

Begin with Mrs. Lathrop’s letter. As a class or in groups, create a schedule of Mrs. Lathrop’s daily life as reported in her letter. Have students list words and phrases from the letter that indicate how Lathrop feels about her life. Have students read Sources 5.4 and 5.5 to compare laundry tasks for affluent women vs. the rural poor. Ask students to imagine how different housewives would describe their lives. What evidence will students use to construct these images? Using a Venn diagram, ask students to work with a partner to contrast the lives of upper-class women before and after electricity. This will give students a sense of change and continuity for one social class, and the ways electricity altered their housework.

图像

本章的重点是通过确凿的资料来了解 20 年代技术的影响。工具 5.3将评估这一目标。此外,学生还可以制作一张 T 形图,一方面显示技术对 20 年代女性的积极影响,另一方面显示技术对女性的负面影响。要求学生给出他们的初步印象,然后在处理来源时将想法、引文和信息添加到此图表中。要求学生重新审视他们最初的回答,并在整个课程中随着他们了解更多内容定期修改它们。接下来用一段或完整的文章来回答这个问题:1921 年技术对女性的影响主要是积极的还是消极的?与每一篇论文一样,要求学生利用来源证据来支持他们的论点。

A major focus of this chapter is to understand the impact of technology in the 1920s through corroborating sources. Tool 5.3 will assess this objective. In addition, students could create a T chart, with positive influences of technology on women in the 1920s on one side and negative influences on the other. Ask students to give their initial impression and then add ideas, quotations, and information to this chart as they work with the sources. Ask students to revisit their initial responses and revise them periodically throughout the lesson as they learn more. Follow this up with a paragraph or full essay in response to the question: Was the impact of technology on women in 1921 mostly positive or negative? As with every essay, ask students to draw on evidence from sources to support their arguments.


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 证实消息来源
  • Corroborating sources
  • 识别新技术的后果(因果关系)
  • Identifying consequences of new technology (cause-effect relationships)
  • 循证论证
  • Evidence-based argumentation

场景 3(1 小时课程)。20 世纪 20 年代的家庭主妇关心什么?使用在线资源来研究 20 世纪 20 年代家庭主妇面临的挑战。

Scenario 3 (1 Hour Lesson). What were housewives concerned about in the 1920s? Use online resources to examine the challenges housewives faced in the 1920s.


CCSS

9–10 #6

11–12 #7

CCSS

9–10 #6

11–12 #7


阅读莱斯罗普夫人的信,并询问学生信中对莱斯罗普夫人的生活方式有何评价。要考虑这个时代多个家庭主妇的观点,请访问乔治梅森大学历史和新媒体中心的历史事务网站。在那里,搜索历史问题上的一个来源,标题为“‘我只是一台机器’:家庭主妇分析她们的问题。”

Read Mrs. Lathrop’s letter and ask students what it says about Mrs. Lathrop’s lifestyle. To consider multiple housewives’ perspectives from this era, go to the History Matters website at George Mason University’s Center for History and New Media. There, search for a source housed at History Matters entitled, “‘I am only a piece of machinery’: Housewives analyze their problems.”

在这里,学生可以阅读 1923 年寄给妇女家庭伴侣的信件,其中家庭主妇分享了家庭问题和解决方案(我们最喜欢的标题是“不间断的圆圈”)。给学生一个焦点问题,例如“关于 20 年代的家庭主妇,你能得出什么结论?引用来源的证据来支持你的结论。” 您可以返回到拉斯罗普夫人的信中,看看拉斯罗普与《女人之家伴侣》中的女性相比如何。拉斯罗普夫人可能会写什么给妇女之家伴侣?无论观众是谁,她的语气都会保持乐观和快乐吗?本课模拟了历史调查、质疑和来源比较的过程。

Here students may read letters sent to the Woman’s Home Companion in 1923 in which housewives shared household problems and solutions (our favorite is entitled “The Unbroken Circle”). Give students a focus question like “What conclusions can you make about housewives in the 1920s? Cite evidence from the sources to support your conclusions.” You can return to Mrs. Lathrop’s letter to see how Lathrop compares to the women of the Woman’s Home Companion. What might Mrs. Lathrop have written to the Woman’s Home Companion? Would her tone have remained as upbeat and happy, regardless of audience? This lesson models the process of historical investigation, questioning, and comparison of sources.

图像

另一项作业(参见工具 5.4)要求学生选择 1921 年的四组妇女(贫穷的城市、贫穷的农村、富裕的农村、富裕的城市),并安排每个妇女一天的生活。学生应该为每个女性制定一个每日时间表。应参考和引用本章以及历史和新媒体中心网站的资料,以使学生的工作扎根于 20 世纪 20 年代美国的现实。然后,学生可以写下对以下问题的回答:1921 年,拉斯罗普夫人在女性中的代表性如何?

An alternative assignment (see Tool 5.4) asks students to select four groups of women in 1921 (poor urban, poor rural, wealthy rural, wealthy urban) and schedule a day from each woman’s life. Students should construct a daily schedule for each woman. Sources from this chapter, as well as those from the Center for History and New Media website, should be consulted and cited to ground students’ work in the realities of 1920s America. Students could then write a response to the question: How representative was Mrs. Lathrop of women in 1921?

图像


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 证实消息来源
  • Corroborating sources
  • 视角识别
  • Perspective recognition
  • 循证论证
  • Evidence-based argumentation

来源和工具

Sources and Tools

资料来源5.1:亲爱先生。爱迪生(修改

SOURCE 5.1: DEAR MR. EDISON (MODIFIED)


堪斯州诺顿。

1921 年 3 月 5 日

Norton, Kans.

March 5, 1921

爱迪生先生

 

 

非常感谢她等等——

Mr. Edison

 

 

Thank her very much Etc—

尊敬的先生:

Dear Sir:

亲自感谢使女性生活变得更加宜居的物品的发明者并不总是女性的特权……。我是一名大学毕业生,我的丈夫可能是托皮卡和丹佛之间最著名的外科医生之一。我是妇女俱乐部区的一名官员,也是我们城镇组织的主席。

It is not always the privilege of a woman to thank personally the inventor of articles which make life liveable for her sex…. I am a college graduate and probably my husband is one of the best known surgeons between Topeka and Denver. I am an officer in the District of Women’s Club as well as President of our Town Organization.

我们有四个孩子…… 我们有一座大房子,所以你看,当我几乎做所有自己的工作时,我的职责很多,我的活动也多种多样,但我享受我的劳动,并不觉得我完全忽视了从生活中获得乐趣……。房子是用电照明的。我用西屋电灶做饭,用电动洗碗机洗碗。电风扇甚至有助于将热量分散到房子的一部分...... 我用电机洗衣服,用电动熨斗和电熨斗熨烫。我用电动吸尘器打扫房子。我休息、做电动按摩、用电熨斗卷发。穿着由电机驱动的机器缝制的长袍。然后打开留声机,要么学一会儿西班牙语,要么听克莱斯勒格鲁克加利…… 医生回到家,厌倦了一天的工作,其中电力几乎发挥了与在家一样重要的作用,找到了一位妻子……她现在已经休息好了,准备好为疲惫的男人服务并讨论当天的事务……。

We have four children…. We have a large house so you see when doing practically all my own work, my duties are many and my activities most varied, yet I enjoy my labors and do not feel that I entirely neglect to get pleasure out of life…. The house is lighted by electricity. I cook on a Westinghouse electric range, wash dishes in an electric dish washer. An electric fan even helps to distribute the heat over part of the house…. I wash clothes in an electric machine and iron on an electric mangle and with an electric iron. I clean house with electric cleaners. I rest, take an electric massage and curl my hair on an electric iron. Dress in a gown sewed on a machine run by a motor. Then start the Victrola and either study Spanish for a while or listen to Kreisler and Gluck and Galli…. The Doctor comes home, tired with a days work wherein electricity has played almost as much part as it has at home, to find a wife … who is now rested and ready to serve the tired man and discuss affairs of the day….

也许他在没有任何警告的情况下带来了一位客人,但电力和高压锅为女主人挽救了这一天。事实上,我在提前一个多小时通知的情况下招待了我们州的州长和十几位……公民……。

Possibly he brings in a guest without warning but electricity and a pressure cooker save the day for the hostess. Indeed, I’ve entertained the Governor of our State and a dozen of our … citizens at a little more than an hours notice….

请接受爱迪生先生一位最真诚的女士的谢意。我知道我只是对您怀有同样感激之情的众多人之一……。

Please accept the thanks Mr. Edison of one most truly appreciative woman. I know I am only one of many under the same debt of gratitude to you….

真挚地,

Sincerely,

太太。拉斯罗普

MRS. W.C. LATHROP


资料来源:摘自 WC Lathrop 夫人 1921 年 3 月 5 日写给托马斯·爱迪生的信。

Source: Excerpt from Mrs. W. C. Lathrop’s letter to Thomas Edison, March 5, 1921.


字库

WORD BANK


西屋电气 ( Westinghouse) — 一家成立于 1886 年的电力公司

Westinghouse—an electric company founded in 1886

熨斗——压平或抚平衣服的机器

mangle—a machine for pressing or smoothing clothes

Victrola——电唱机品牌

Victrola—a brand of record player

克莱斯勒——1900年代初期著名小提琴家

Kreisler—famous violinist in the early 1900s

格鲁克加利——1900年代初期著名歌手

Gluck and Galli—famous singers in the early 1900s


资料来源5.2:费城的设备所有权修改

SOURCE 5.2: APPLIANCE OWNERSHIP IN PHILADELPHIA (MODIFIED)


注:1920 年,35% 的美国家庭用上了电。其中,大多数是城市和郊区的房屋。这项对费城用电家庭的调查显示了不同家庭拥有的电器种类。

Note: In 1920, 35% of American homes had electricity. Of these, the majority were urban and suburban homes. This survey of homes with electricity in Philadelphia shows the kinds of appliances different people owned there.

 

 

费城 1,300 户电气化家庭的电器拥有量,1921 年

Appliance ownership in 1,300 electrified homes, Philadelphia, 1921

图像


资料来源:CJ Russell,“费城调查”。会议记录,NELA 公约,1921 年。复制于纽约市爱迪生联合图书馆。引自 David Nye,《电气化美国:新技术的社会意义,1880-1940》(马萨诸塞州剑桥:麻省理工学院出版社,1990 年),303。

Source: C. J. Russell, “Philadelphia Survey.” Proceedings, NELA Convention, 1921. Copy in the Consolidated Edison Library, New York City. Cited in David Nye, Electrifying America: Social Meanings of a New Technology, 1880–1940 (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1990), 303.


字库

WORD BANK


现代住宅——指新建的住宅

modern homes—refers to homes that were newly built

更好的阶级——指的是更富裕或富有的家庭

better class—refers to homes of the more affluent or wealthy

渗滤器——一种咖啡机

percolator—a kind of coffee maker


资料来源5.3:美国农村地区的电力(修改

SOURCE 5.3: ELECTRICITY IN RURAL AMERICA (MODIFIED)


注:以下是一位历史学家对 20 世纪 20 年代和 1930 年代农村地区电力供应不足且成本高昂的解释。

Note: Here is one historian’s explanation of the low availability and high cost of electricity in rural areas in the 1920s and 1930s.

1920 年的联邦人口普查……报告称,在美国 6,000,000 个农场中,只有 452,620 个农场有电灯,643,899 个农场有某种形式的自来水……。大多数通电农舍集中在新英格兰和远西部,那里的服务农场数量分别占 15% 至 45%。中西部和南部排名最低,从 10% 到不到 1%……。

The federal census of 1920 … reported that of the 6,000,000 farms in the United States, only 452,620 had electric lights and 643,899 had some form of running water…. Most of the farm homes with electricity were concentrated in New England and the far West where the number of serviced farms ranged from 15 to 45 percent respectively. The Midwest and South ranked lowest, ranging from 10 percent to less than 1 percent….

在 1935 年农村电气化管理局(REA)成立之前,电力公司拥有为农民服务的特权,但由于成本高昂,他们行动缓慢或不愿意这样做……。

Until the creation of the Rural Electrification Administration (REA) in 1935, power companies had the prerogative to serve farmers, but they were slow or unwilling to do so because of the high cost involved….

成本是服务的真正障碍。农村线路每英里的成本为 2,000 美元或更多,而且由于该国每英里通常只有两到五个住宅,公用事业公司预计摊销投资的收入较低。他们更喜欢城市市场。因此,公司希望农民承担初始投资的负担,向他们收取线路成本或 500 至 1,000 美元的押金。农村地区的电费也很高,最低用量约为每千瓦时 9 至 10 美分。对于城市居民来说,没有这样的不利条件,他们支付每千瓦时 4 至 5 美分的费用,并且没有义务支付线路成本。

Cost was the real stumbling block to service. Rural lines cost $2,000 or more per mile, and since there were usually only two to five dwellings per mile in the country, utilities anticipated low revenue to amortize investments. They preferred the urban market. Companies expected farmers, therefore, to bear the burden of the initial investment charging them with the cost of the line, or a $500 to $1,000 deposit. Rural rates were also high, about 9 to 10 cents per kilowatt-hour for the minimum usage. No such adverse conditions applied to city dwellers who paid 4 to 5 cents per kilowatt-hour and were under no obligation to pay for the cost of the line.

很少有农村房主能够负担得起线路费用或押金,他们一开始也买不起足够的电器来使用实现较低电价优势所需的电量。其结果是双方的费用陷入无休止的循环——服务接受者由于费率高而很少使用电力,而公用事业公司由于使用率低而收取这样的费率。

Few rural homeowners could afford to pay for the lines or make the deposit, nor could they at first afford enough appliances to use the amount of electricity necessary to achieve the advantage of lower rates. The effect was an endless cycle of expense for both parties—recipients of service used little power because of high rates, and the utilities charged such rates because of low usage.


资料来源:摘自 D. Clayton Brown,《美国农村电力:为 REA 而战》(康涅狄格州韦斯特波特:格林伍德出版社,1980 年)。xv-xvi 和 3-5。

Source: Excerpts from D. Clayton Brown, Electricity for Rural America: The Fight for the REA (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1980). xv–xvi and 3–5.


字库

WORD BANK


特权——排他性权利

prerogative—an exclusive right

收入——赚取的收入

revenue—earned income

摊销——逐步还清

amortize—to gradually pay off

不利的——违背某人的利益

adverse—against one’s interest


资料来源5.4 :1920年代富裕女性工作修改

SOURCE 5.4: AFFLUENT WOMEN’S WORK IN THE 1920S (MODIFIED)


注:以下是一位历史学家对新技术对20 年代富裕女性家务劳动影响有限的解释。

Note: Here is one historian’s explanation of the limited effect new technologies had on the household work of affluent women in the 1920s.

这一代普通舒适的家庭主妇学会了在没有仆人协助的情况下组织家里的工作,或者比她母亲所需要的协助时间少得多。真空吸尘器取代了仆人,舒适的家庭主妇花在整理地板和地毯上的时间比她母亲还要多。洗衣工被洗衣机取代……家庭主妇把时间花在做家务上,而在她母亲的时代,这些家务是由其他人做的…… 每一个“自己动手”的决定都是增加家庭主妇工作时间的决定。在富裕的家庭中,节省劳力的设备所节省的劳动力不是家庭主妇的,而是她的帮手的。

The average comfortable housewife of this generation learned to organize the work in her household without the assistance of servants or with far fewer hours of assistance than her mother had had. Where a servant had been replaced by a vacuum cleaner, the comfortable housewife was spending more time than her mother had spent getting the floors and the rugs into shape; where a laundress had been replaced by a washing machine … a housewife was spending time on chores that, in her mother’s day, had been performed by other people…. Every decision to “do it myself” was a decision to increase the time that the housewife would spend at her work. In households that were prosperous, the labor saved by labor-saving devices was that not of the housewife but of her helpers. This is the most salient reason that every time-study of affluent housewives during these years … revealed that no matter how many appliances they owned, or how many conveniences were at their command, they were still spending roughly the same number of hours per week at housework as their mothers had.


资料来源:摘自 Ruth Schwartz Cowan,《为母亲做更多的工作:从平炉到微波炉的家庭技术的讽刺》(纽约:Basic Books,1983 年),178。

Source: Excerpt from Ruth Schwartz Cowan, More Work for Mother: The Ironies of Household Technology from the Open Hearth to the Microwave (New York: Basic Books, 1983), 178.


字库

WORD BANK


富裕——富有

affluent—wealthy


资料来源5.5 :1920年代贫困农村妇女工作(修改

SOURCE 5.5: POOR, RURAL WOMEN’S WORK IN THE 1920S (MODIFIED)


注:以下是一位历史学家对农村妇女在没有电器的情况下洗衣服的漫长过程的解释。

Note: Here is one historian’s explanation of the long process of washing clothes used by rural women without the benefit of electric appliances.

没有电,连烧水都行。由于没有电力来驱动水泵,只有一种方式取水用手。一项针对近 50 万农场家庭的联邦研究表明,平均而言,农场里的一个人每天消耗 40 加仑的水。由于农场家庭平均有 5 口人​​,因此家庭每天使用 200 加仑的水——一年 73,000 加仑。研究表明……这口井距离房屋 253 英尺,每年要用手抽水并将 73,000 加仑的水运到房屋,需要有人在这一年里每天投入 63 个八小时的水,并步行 1,750 英里。英里。

Without electricity, even boiling water was work. Without electricity to work a pump, there was only one way to obtain water: by hand. A federal study of nearly half a million farm families would show that, on the average, a person living on a farm used 40 gallons of water every day. Since the average farm family was five persons, the family used 200 gallons … of water each day—73,000 gallons in a year. The study showed that … the well was located 253 feet from the house—and that to pump by hand and carry to the house 73,000 gallons of water a year would require someone to put in during that year 63 eight-hour days, and walk 1,750 miles.

每周,全年每周——每周无一例外——都有洗涤日。洗衣服是在外面进行的。一大桶沸水悬挂在一个更大的、熊熊燃烧的火上,附近有三个大的“三号”锌制洗衣盆……。衣服将在第一个锌桶中擦洗,由一名妇女弯腰在浴缸上在洗衣板上擦洗……。

Every week, every week all year long—every week without fail—there was washday. The wash was done outside. A huge vat of boiling water would be suspended over a larger, roaring fire and near it three large “Number Three” zinc washtubs…. The clothes would be scrubbed in the first of the zinc tubs, scrubbed on a washboard by a woman bending over the tub….

然后农妇会把每件衣服都拧干,尽量去掉脏水,然后放进烧开水的大桶里……。她会尝试通过“拳打”桶中的衣服来清除剩余的[污垢]——站在沸水上方,用木桨或更常见的是扫帚搅拌衣服,然后将它们扫过桶中。浇水,然后将它们压在底部或侧面,尽可能用力上下移动扫帚柄十到十五分钟……

Then the farm wife would wring out each piece of clothing to remove from it as much as possible of the dirty water, and put it in the big vat of boiling water…. She would try to get the rest [of the dirt] out by “punching” the clothes in the vat—standing over the boiling water and using a wooden paddle or, more often, a broomstick, to stir the clothes and swish them through the water and press them against the bottom or sides, moving the broom handle up and down and around as hard as she could for ten or fifteen minutes….

下一步是将衣服从沸水中转移到三个锌洗涤桶中的第二个:“漂洗桶”。……当衣服放入漂洗桶时,这位女士弯下身子,将每件衣服在水中漂洗,进行漂洗。然后她拧干衣服,尽可能多地排出脏水,然后将衣服放入第三个装有蓝色的桶中,然后将它们在里面旋转——这一次是为了让整个衣服都变蓝,使它变白——然后在装满淀粉的洗碗盆中重复相同的动作。

The next step was to transfer the clothes from the boiling water to the second of the three zinc washtubs: the “rinse tub.” … When the clothes were in the rinse tub, the woman bent over the tub and rinsed them, by swishing each individual item through the water. Then she wrung out the clothes, to get as much of the dirty water out as possible, and placed the clothes in the third tub, which contained bluing, and swished them around in it—this time to get the bluing all through the garment and make it white—and then repeated the same movements in the dishpan, which was filled with starch.

至此,一批洗涤工作就完成了。一周的洗涤至少需要四次洗涤...... 此外,对于每个负载,三个洗涤桶中的每一个中的水都必须更换。一个洗衣盆大约有八加仑…… 她用一个装有三四加仑(二十五到三十磅)的桶来填充。

At this point, one load of wash would be done. A week’s wash took at least four loads…. For each load, moreover, the water in each of the three washtubs would have to be changed. A washtub held about eight gallons…. She did the filling with a bucket which held three or four gallons—twenty-five or thirty pounds.

……拖水、擦洗、打孔、冲洗:一位山地农场的妻子连续几个小时这样做,而一位城市的妻子则通过按下电动洗衣机上的按钮来完成这项工作。

… Hauling the water, scrubbing, punching, rinsing: a Hill Country farm wife did this for hours on end—while a city wife did it by pressing the button on her electric washing machine.


资料来源:摘自罗伯特·卡罗,《林登·约翰逊的岁月:权力之路》(纽约:Alfred A. Knopf,1982),504-509。

Source: Excerpt from Robert Caro, The Years of Lyndon Johnson: The Path to Power (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1982), 504–509.


字库

WORD BANK


获得——接收或占有

obtain—to receive or take possession of

上蓝——一种用于增白衣服的物质

bluing—a substance used to whiten clothes

淀粉——一种用于洗涤以使织物变硬的物质

starch—a substance used in laundering to stiffen fabrics


工具5.1:将来源置于上下文

TOOL 5.1: PUTTING SOURCES INTO CONTEXT


说明:为了更好地理解拉斯罗普夫人的世界观,请尝试想象她写这封信的时间和地点。阅读源代码 5.1并回答以下问题。

Directions: To better understand Mrs. Lathrop’s view of the world, try to imagine the time and place in which she wrote this letter. Read Source 5.1 and answer the following questions.

  1. 这是写在哪里的?



  2. Where was this written?



  3. 转至http://maps.google.com/并搜索 Lathrop 夫人所在的城镇和州。
    1. 这个小镇位于美国的哪个地区?



    2. 这个城镇位于该州的哪个部分?



    3. 距离当时最近的主要城市托皮卡和丹佛有多远?



  4. Go to http://maps.google.com/ and search for Mrs. Lathrop’s town and state.
    1. In what region of the United States is this town located?



    2. In what part of the state is this town?



    3. How far is it to the closest major cities of that time period—Topeka and Denver?



  5. 转至弗吉尼亚大学图书馆的历史人口普查浏览器 ( http://mapserver.lib.virginia.edu )。
    1. 单击 1920 年人口普查数据。
    2. 搜索两个变量:总人口和每平方英里人口。
    3. 请注意下表中堪萨斯州的数字。
    4. 将堪萨斯州每平方英里的人口与其他州进行比较 - 转到页面底部并按每平方英里的人口降序对数据进行排序。点击“提交”。从上往下数,看看堪萨斯州的人口密度排名第几。
    5. 对于堪萨斯州,请注意下表中诺顿县的数字。
    6. 将诺顿县与堪萨斯州其他县的每平方英里人口进行比较 - 转到页面底部并按每平方英里人口降序对数据进行排序。点击“提交”。从上往下数,看看诺顿县的人口密度排名。图像
  6. Go to the Historical Census Browser at the University of Virginia’s library (http://mapserver.lib.virginia.edu).
    1. Click on the 1920 Census data.
    2. Search for two variables: total population and population per square mile.
    3. Note the figures for Kansas in the table below.
    4. Compare the population per square mile for Kansas to other states—go to the bottom of the page and sort the data by population per square mile in descending order. Click “submit.” Count from the top to see where Kansas ranked in terms of population density.
    5. Specifying Kansas, note the figures for Norton County in the table below.
    6. Compare the population per square mile for Norton County with other counties in Kansas—go to the bottom of the page and sort the data by population per square mile in descending order. Click “submit.” Count from the top to see where Norton County ranked in terms of population density.
  7. 您会将拉斯罗普夫人所在的城镇描述为乡村、城市还是郊区?为什么?





  8. Would you characterize Mrs. Lathrop’s town as rural, urban, or suburban? Why?





  9. 这个源码是什么时候写的?





  10. When was this source written?





  11. 撰写本文时还发生了什么?列出当天的 3 个事件或问题,并解释为什么它们对于理解此来源可能很重要。





  12. What else was happening at the time this was written? List 3 events or issues of the day, and explain why they might be important to understanding this source.





  13. 根据她的信,拉斯罗普夫人拥有什么物质财富?列出它们。





  14. According to her letter, what material goods does Mrs. Lathrop own? List them.





  15. 列出拉斯罗普夫人信中可能表明她社会地位的详细信息。





  16. List details from Mrs. Lathrop’s letter that might indicate her social status.





  17. 您认为莱斯罗普夫人在 20 年代堪萨斯州的女性中具有怎样的代表性?使用您阅读和研究中的详细信息来支持您的答案。
  18. How representative of women in Kansas in the 1920s do you think Mrs. Lathrop was? Use details from your reading and research to support your answer.

工具5.2 :比较MRS _ 拉斯罗普她的同时代

TOOL 5.2: COMPARING MRS. LATHROP TO HER CONTEMPORARIES


  1. 1920 年,堪萨斯州通电的农场比例是多少?(提示:参见源码 5.3









  2. What percentage of farms in Kansas had electricity in 1920? (Hint: See Source 5.3)









  3. 根据资料来源 5.3,1920年什么样的农村或农户用上了电?使用来源证据进行解释。









  4. Based on Source 5.3, what kind of rural or farm households had electricity in 1920? Explain using evidence from the sources.









  5. 为什么没有更多的农村家庭用上电?









  6. Why didn’t more rural households have electricity?









  7. 费城位于该国的哪个地区?1920 年费城是城市还是乡村?你怎么知道?使用 1920 年人口普查数据来证明你的答案。









  8. In what part of the country is Philadelphia located? Was Philadelphia an urban or rural area in 1920? How do you know? Use the 1920 Census data to justify your answer.









  9. 列出您在工具 5.1中为 Lathrop 夫人制作的物资和器具清单。将她拥有的房产与 1921 年费城的贫困、普通和高档住宅进行比较。 图像









  10. Take the list of material goods and appliances that you made in Tool 5.1 for Mrs. Lathrop. Compare what she owns with poor, average, and better-class homes in Philadelphia in 1921.









  11. 拉斯罗普夫人的家庭与农村、城市、上层阶级和下层阶级家庭相比如何?









  12. How does Mrs. Lathrop’s household compare with rural, urban, upper-class, and lower-class households?









  13. 根据这些来源和 1920 年人口普查,您可以对 Lathrop 夫人的社会地位得出什么结论?使用来源证据解释你的结论的基础。









  14. Based on these sources and the 1920 Census, what conclusions can you make about Mrs. Lathrop’s social status? Explain the basis for your conclusions using evidence from the sources.









  15. 1921 年,拉斯罗普夫人在女性中的代表性如何?引用来源中的证据来支持你的想法。
  16. How representative was Mrs. Lathrop of women in 1921? Cite evidence from the sources to support your ideas.

工具5.3 :1920年代女人电力1920年代影响_ _

TOOL 5.3: THE 1920S WOMAN: THE EFFECTS OF ELECTRICITY IN THE 1920S


  1. 拉斯罗普夫人向爱迪生先生描述的白天做了什么?使用来源 5.1列出她的活动。









  2. What does Mrs. Lathrop do during the day that she describes to Mr. Edison? Using Source 5.1, list her activities.









  3. 您认为拉斯罗普夫人的日常生活与大多数农村家庭主妇相比如何?









  4. How do you think Mrs. Lathrop’s daily life compares to that of the majority of rural housewives?









  5. 使用资料来源 5.45.5,比较 20 年代农村贫困人口和“舒适”或上层阶级家庭主妇的洗衣过程。



    图像



  6. Using Sources 5.4 and 5.5, compare the process of doing laundry in the 1920s for the rural poor and “comfortable,” or upper-class, housewives.







  7. 重新检查来源 5.1。列出一些表明莱斯罗普夫人对她的生活的感受的单词和短语。









  8. Reexamine Source 5.1. List some words and phrases that indicate how Mrs. Lathrop feels about her life.









  9. 你认为为什么拉斯罗普夫人在信中没有提到任何关于电的负面言论?









  10. Why do you think Mrs. Lathrop did not say anything negative about electricity in her letter?









  11. 您认为拉斯罗普夫人生活在缺电的农村地区的同龄人会如何描述他们的生活?









  12. How do you think Mrs. Lathrop’s peers in rural areas that lacked electricity would describe their lives?









  13. 根据考恩的说法,电力和新技术如何改变了拉斯罗普夫人的生活?(提示:将拉斯罗普夫人与她的母亲进行比较。使用下面的维恩图来了解这些变化。)



    图像



  14. According to Cowan, how did electricity and new technology change Mrs. Lathrop’s life? (Hint: Compare Mrs. Lathrop with her mother. Use the Venn diagram below to get a sense of these changes.)







  15. 1921年,电力改变了谁的生活?这些变化是积极的吗?使用你面前的证据解释为什么或为什么不。
  16. Whose lives were changed by electricity in 1921? Were these changes positive? Explain why or why not, using the evidence before you.

工具5.4评估学生观点代表性佐证性的理解_ _

TOOL 5.4: ASSESSING STUDENTS’ UNDERSTANDING OF PERSPECTIVE, REPRESENTATIVENESS, AND CORROBORATION


说明:使用提供的资源,为生活在 1921 年的四位不同女性的一天生活制定一个日程表。引用帮助您构建这些女性日程表的资源。

Directions: Using the sources provided, create a schedule for a day in the life of four different women living in 1921. Cite the sources that helped you construct these women’s schedules.

图像

哪一个时间表最像拉斯罗普夫人的?你怎么知道?

Which schedule seems most like Mrs. Lathrop’s? How do you know?

 

 

拉斯罗普夫人的日程安排与其他日程安排相比如何?

How does Mrs. Lathrop’s schedule compare to the other schedules?

建议资源

Suggested Resources

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/women/womensbook.html

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/women/womensbook.html

该页面由福特汉姆大学的保罗·哈尔索尔 (Paul Halsall) 运营,是多本互联网历史资料书籍之一。这个特定页面提供了关注北美和世界各地女性历史的文档和网站的链接。

This page, run by Paul Halsall at Fordham University, is one of several Internet History Sourcebooks. This particular page features links to documents and websites that focus on women’s history both in North America and around the world.

http://www.womenshistorymonth.gov/

http://www.womenshistorymonth.gov/

该页面由美国国会图书馆制作,收藏了丰富多样的与美国妇女历史相关的主要文献。有一长串展品和藏品,包括照片、广告、宣传海报和文本文件。

This page, produced by the Library of Congress, has a rich and varied collection of primary documents related to women’s history in the United States. There is a long list of exhibits and collections that include photographs, advertisements, propaganda posters, and text-based documents.

http://ocp.hul.harvard.edu/ww/

http://ocp.hul.harvard.edu/ww/

该网站由哈佛大学运营,重点关注 1800 年至 1930 年美国女性的工作。馆藏包括图像和文本文档。

Run by Harvard University, this site focuses on women’s work in the United States from 1800 to 1930. The collection includes images and text-based documents.

http://www.nwhm.org/exhibits/index.html

http://www.nwhm.org/exhibits/index.html

该页面由国家妇女历史博物馆运营,包括几个有关美国妇女历史不同方面的网络展览。

This page, run by the National Women’s History Museum, includes several cyber exhibits of different aspects of women’s history in America.

http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=old&doc=46#

http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=old&doc=46#

请在此站点查看托马斯·爱迪生的电灯泡专利申请,该站点由Our Documents.Gov网站运营(由国家历史日、国家档案和记录管理局、美国自由军团、西门子、美国新闻与世界报道和历史频道)。

See Thomas Edison’s patent application for the electric light bulb at this site, run by the Our Documents.Gov website (a cooperative effort by National History Day, National Archives and Records Administration, USA Freedom Corps, Siemens, U.S. News & World Report, and The History Channel).

http://edsitement.neh.gov/view_lesson_plan.asp?id=408#LESSON1

http://edsitement.neh.gov/view_lesson_plan.asp?id=408#LESSON1

该页面由国家人文基金会运营,提供一系列课程,帮助学生了解 1800 年代末和 1900 年代初引入新技术之前和之后的生活。

This page, run by the National Endowment for the Humanities, offers a series of lessons to help students understand life before and after new technologies were introduced in the late 1800s and early 1900s.

http://www1.assump.edu/WHW/

http://www1.assumption.edu/WHW/

本页面是国家人文基金会资助的产物,由易三仓学院、美国古物学会、教育联盟和伍斯特妇女历史项目运营。它包括丰富的主要文献以及教师资源,其中包含将妇女历史纳入课程的想法。

This page is the product of a grant by the National Endowment of the Humanities and is run by Assumption College, the American Antiquarian Society, the Alliance for Education, and the Worcester Women’s History Project. It includes a rich collection of primary documents as well as teacher resources with ideas for integrating women’s history into the curriculum.

 

 


第 6 章

CHAPTER 6


“吃灰尘,呼吸灰尘,喝灰尘”

“Dust to Eat, and Dust to Breathe, and Dust to Drink”

图像

阿瑟·罗斯坦(Arthur Rothstein),农场外屋前堆满了沙子。俄克拉荷马州西马伦县。1936 年 4 月。农场安全管理局——战争信息办公室照片集。网址:http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/fsa1998018977/PP/

Arthur Rothstein, Sand piled up in front of outhouse on farm. Cimarron County, Oklahoma. April 1936. Farm Security Administration—Office of War Information Photograph Collection. Available at http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/fsa1998018977/PP/

“男人和女人挤在屋里,出门时用手帕捂住鼻子,戴着护目镜保护眼睛。” 约翰·斯坦贝克 (John Steinbeck) 获得普利策奖的小说《愤怒的葡萄》的开头几页描述了 20 世纪 30 年代中期俄克拉荷马州生活的严峻现实。人们所熟悉的生活消失了,被灰尘吹走了,许多人,比如斯坦贝克的乔德一家,逃离了家园,开始了新的生活。乔德一家在 66 号公路上的旅程以及他们在加利福尼亚州寻找可持续工作的斗争是斯坦贝克故事的主题,这个故事自 1939 年问世以来一直吸引着读者。斯坦贝克的小说不仅是一个引人入胜的故事,而且是对政治和社会的批判揭露了加州农场工人遭受的剥削和虐待。

“Men and women huddled in their houses, and they tied handkerchiefs over their noses when they went out, and wore goggles to protect their eyes.” The opening pages of John Steinbeck’s Pulitzer Prize–winning novel The Grapes of Wrath describe the grim realities of living in Oklahoma in the mid-1930s. Life as people knew it disappeared, blown away by the dust, and many, like Steinbeck’s Joad family, fled their homes to make a new life. The Joads’ trip on Route 66 and their struggles to find sustainable work in California are the subject of Steinbeck’s tale, one that has captivated readers since its appearance in 1939. Not only is it an engaging story, Steinbeck’s novel was a political and social critique that exposed the exploitation and mistreatment of California’s farm workers.

许多人都熟悉那些在 20 世纪 30 年代沙尘暴期间离开受灾地区的人们的故事。Okies、Dorothea Lange 的照片、Woody Guthrie 的歌曲和 Joads——这些细节都留在了我们的集体记忆中。但是那些在长达八年的干旱期间没有离开平原的人们呢?那些勇敢的农民的故事呢?他们留下来,即使土地漂移并消失在他们脚下——灰尘通过无保护的裂缝爬进他们的家,或者更不祥的是,在乌云中降临,窒息了所接触到的一切?这些故事不会像移民故事那样引发人们的认可或试金石品质。然而,它们与那些更容易叙述的事物一样,都是我们过去的一部分。

The story of those who left the afflicted region during the 1930s Dust Bowl is familiar to many. Okies, Dorothea Lange’s photos, Woody Guthrie’s songs, and the Joads—these particulars are lodged in our collective memory. But what about the people who didn’t leave the Plains during what seemed an interminable 8 years of drought? What about the stories of the intrepid farmers who stayed behind even as the land drifted and disappeared beneath them—as dust crept into their homes through unprotected cracks or, more ominously, descended in a black cloud that smothered all it touched? Such stories don’t trigger the same recognition or touchstone quality that those of the migrants do. Yet they are just as much a part of our past as those more easily recounted.

历史充满故事。故事是我们分享过去发生的事情以及理解过去的方式。通常,它们最初激发了我们探索过去及其细节和意义的兴趣。而这些故事需要做出无数的选择:我们要讲谁的故事?我们将重点关注哪些事件?编织一个关于过去的准确故事的关键细节是什么?与斯坦贝克令人惊叹的小说不同,历史故事必须坚持文献记录并有证据支持。1在本章中,我们将探讨有关沙尘暴的各种故事,首先是那些留下来的人的故事,然后是解释故事——沙尘暴是如何发生的?历史学家不再局限于描述性故事,而是讲述解释性故事,他们解释这场环境和人类灾难的方式也随着时间的推移而发生了变化。所有这些方面对于理解沙尘暴以及我们讲述的故事都是不可或缺的。

History is full of stories. Stories are how we share what happened in bygone days and how we make sense of that past. Often, they are what initially piques our interest to explore the past and its specifics and significance. And these stories require making innumerable choices: Whose story will we tell? What events will we focus on? What are the critical specifics for weaving an accurate story about that past? Unlike Steinbeck’s stunning piece of fiction, historical stories must stick to the documentary record and be supported by evidence.1 In this chapter, we examine various stories about the Dust Bowl, first the stories of those left behind, then stories of explanation—how did the Dust Bowl happen? Historians move beyond descriptive stories to tell explanatory stories, and the ways that they have explained this environmental and human disaster have changed over time. All of these aspects are integral to understanding the Dust Bowl and the stories we tell about it.

我们讲述谁的故事?

Whose Story Do We Tell?

卡罗琳·亨德森 (Caroline Henderson) 是一名教师,于 1907 年搬到俄克拉荷马州狭长地带,同年印第安人和俄克拉荷马领地合并成为一个州。卡罗琳在那里度过了近 60 年,遇见了她的丈夫,建造了家园,抚养了女儿,获得了文学硕士学位,并为杂志和期刊写作。她的文章充满了清晰而令人信服的描述,有助于引起全国对沙尘暴居民在最黑暗时期的困境的关注。

Caroline Henderson was a schoolteacher who moved to the Oklahoma Panhandle in 1907, the year the Indian and Oklahoma territories joined to become a state. Caroline would spend almost 60 years there, meeting her husband, building a homestead, raising a daughter, earning her master’s degree in literature, and writing for magazines and journals. Her articles, filled with clear and compelling descriptions, helped to bring national attention to the plight of the Dust Bowl residents during its darkest days.

“沙尘暴”指的是20世纪30年代遭受侵蚀和沙尘暴最严重的大平原地区。该地区包括俄克拉荷马州、德克萨斯州、堪萨斯州、科罗拉多州的部分地区以及新墨西哥州和内布拉斯加州的较小地区,面积约 1 亿英亩,占大平原的三分之一以上。在该地区内,“吹袭区域”的大小和位置发生了变化,促使历史学家唐纳德·沃斯特(Donald Worster)将沙尘暴称为“一个事件,也是一个地点”。2受灾最严重的地区是德克萨斯州和俄克拉荷马州狭长地带堪萨斯州西南角。在风暴最严重的几年(1935 年至 1937 年)期间,这种不断变化的打击区域覆盖了大约 5000 万英亩的南部平原。

The “Dust Bowl” refers to the region of the Great Plains that suffered the erosion and dust storms in the 1930s most acutely. This region, encompassing parts of Oklahoma, Texas, Kansas, Colorado, and smaller areas of New Mexico and Nebraska, extended approximately 100 million acres, or over one-third of the Great Plains. Within that region, the “blow area” shifted in size and location, prompting historian Donald Worster to call the Dust Bowl “an event as well as a locality.”2 The hardest-hit areas were the Texas and Oklahoma Panhandles and the southwestern corner of Kansas. Between the worst years of the storms, 1935–1937, this shifting blow area covered approximately 50 million acres of the southern plains.

该地区是美国大陆最后有人定居的地区之一。由于树木稀少、降雨少、气温高,这里被称为“美国大沙漠”和“无人区”。3来自青翠、水资源丰富的南部、中西部和东部的定居者并不急于尝试在这种半干旱气候下耕作。促进向西定居的铁路直到 1916 年才到达俄克拉荷马州狭长地带,加剧了该地区的孤立。

This area was one of the last regions in the continental United States to be settled. With few trees, little rainfall, and high temperatures, it had been called both the Great American Desert and No Man’s Land.3 Settlers from the verdant, water-rich South, Midwest, and East weren’t anxious to try farming in this semi-arid climate. And the railroads that facilitated westward settlement didn’t reach the Oklahoma Panhandle until 1916, adding to the region’s isolation.

卡罗琳·亨德森 (Caroline Henderson) 是该地区 20 世纪早期定居者的一部分。她会在繁荣的岁月里在那里,那时正常的(尽管仍然稀少的)降雨、战时对粮食的需求以及铁路帮助创造了经济的美好时光。但她所经历的困难多于美好。在 1932 年至 1940 年间,即沙尘暴时期,那些艰难时期变得几乎难以忍受。4

Caroline Henderson was part of the early-20th-century settlement of this region. She would be there during its prosperous years, when normal (if still sparse) rainfall, wartime demand for grain, and the railroad helped create economic good times. But she would suffer more hard times than good. And those hard times became almost unbearable during 1932–1940, the years of the Dust Bowl.4

1935年4月14日,一场巨大的沙尘暴袭击了该地区。科罗拉多州巴卡县东南部的 JH 沃德 (JH Ward) 看到不祥的厚云从山上滚滚向他袭来;当云接近并吞噬其路径上的一切时,他拍摄了一定是可怕的景象(来源6.1))。民谣歌手伍迪·格思里(Woody Guthrie)那天会写一首歌曲,其标题令人毛骨悚然:“再见,认识你真是太好了。” 格思里写道,他离开了“德克萨斯州西部平原”的家,因为他必须“漂流”,更不祥的是,沙尘暴“如雷霆般袭来”,看起来就像“世界末日”,捕捉到了害怕他的邻居。4 月的那个日子后来被称为“黑色星期日”,很可能是 20 世纪 30 年代袭击平原的最严重的沙尘暴。第二天,美联社记者罗伯特·E·盖革创造了“灰尘碗”这个词。5

On April 14, 1935, a huge dust storm hit the region. J. H. Ward, in the southeastern county of Baca, Colorado, saw the ominous, thick cloud rolling over the hill toward him; he took photos of what must have been a terrifying sight as the cloud approached, swallowing everything in its path (Source 6.1). Folksinger Woody Guthrie would write a song that day, with the eerie title “So Long, It’s Been Good to Know Yuh.” Guthrie wrote about leaving his home on “the west Texas plains,” as he had “to be driftin’ along,” and more ominously that the dust storm “hit like thunder” and seemed like “the end of the world,” capturing the fear of his neighbors. That April day would come to be known as Black Sunday and was likely the worst dust storm that hit the Plains during the 1930s. The very next day, the term “Dust Bowl” was coined by Associated Press reporter Robert E. Geiger.5

被称为“滚滚”和“黑色暴风雪”的沙尘暴在“肮脏的三十年代”相对频繁。1932 年,至少有 14 场风暴袭击了该地区,从 1933 年到 1938 年,风暴次数超过 300 场。 6这些风暴大多发生在冬季和春季,使天空变黑,席卷整个大地,渗透到房屋、眼睛、和肺——灰尘一旦落下,就无处可逃。各个年龄段的人都患有“粉尘肺炎”。建筑物和农作物被覆盖和毁坏,学校和城镇关闭,交通停止,人们想知道世界末日是否已经发生,以及他们做了什么而应得的。

Dust storms known as “rollers” and “black blizzards” were relatively frequent in the “dirty ’30s.” In 1932, at least 14 storms hit the region, and from 1933 to 1938, there were more than 300.6 Mostly occurring in the winter and spring, these storms blackened the sky, sweeping over and through the landscape, infiltrating homes, eyes, and lungs—once the dust descended, there was no escape. People of all ages suffered from “dust pneumonia.” Buildings and crops were covered and destroyed, schools and towns shut down, transportation stopped, and people wondered whether Armageddon had hit and what they had done to deserve it.

风暴对沙尘暴地区造成了严重破坏,并蔓延到更远的地方。巨大的尘埃云穿过大陆,到达东部和南部海岸。1934 年 5 月,《纽约时报》的头条新闻宣称:“巨大的尘云,吹过 1,500 英里,在迪姆斯市 5 小时内飞行。” 据估计,这片云有 1,800 英里宽,重 3 亿吨,使纽约市空气中的尘埃颗粒增加了 2.7 倍。7在距大西洋海岸 300 英里的地方,船只报告甲板上有灰尘,而后来的风暴则在墨西哥湾沿岸留下了残留物。8

The storms wreaked havoc on the Dust Bowl region and extended beyond. Giant clouds of dust advanced across the continent to both Eastern and Southern coasts. In May 1934, headlines in the New York Times proclaimed, “Huge Dust Cloud, Blown 1,500 Miles, Dims City 5 Hours.” That cloud was estimated to be 1,800 miles wide, weigh 300 million tons, and increase the dust particles in the air in New York City by 2.7 times.7 Three hundred miles off the Atlantic Coast, ships reported dust on their decks, while later storms left a residue along the Gulf Coast.8

但黑色星期日风暴被一位堪萨斯州居民称为“最黑暗的一天”。9前几周遭受猛烈风暴袭击的居民迎来了今天早上的晴好天气。然而,原本是一个美丽的周日,气温在 80 多度,地平线清晰可见,但很快就变成了一场可怕的风暴,以至于宝琳·温克勒·格雷 (Pauline Winkler Gray) 后来记得当时的想法是“世界末日”。10据报道,风暴从北达科他州向南和向西移动,进入堪萨斯州和科罗拉多州,风暴宽 200 英里,移动速度为每小时 65 英里。气温迅速下降;与其他目击者的呼应,沃德的照片显示了晴朗的天空和向他冲来的大量表土之间的对比。“天空仿佛被分成了两个相对的世界……蔚蓝的天空,金色的阳光,宁静;......[和]一道由沸腾的黑色尘埃组成的险恶的帷幕。” 11一名男孩在堪萨斯州海斯与朋友玩耍时跑回家,但无法赶上暴风雨——第二天,他被发现被灰尘窒息身亡。难怪许多人逃离了尘暴区。暴风雨是袭击居民经济生计、健康安全、威胁日常生活的顽敌。

But the Black Sunday storm was what one Kansas resident called “the darkest day of all.”9 Residents who had suffered ferocious storms in prior weeks welcomed the fine weather that morning. Yet what started as a beautiful Sunday with temperatures in the 80s and a clear view of the horizon quickly descended into a storm so terrible that Pauline Winkler Grey later remembered thinking “it was the end of the world.”10 Moving from North Dakota southerly and westerly into Kansas and Colorado, the storm was reported to be 200 miles wide and moving at 65 miles an hour. Temperatures dropped quickly; echoing other eyewitnesses, Ward’s photograph shows the contrast between the clear sky and the tons of topsoil barreling toward him. “It was as though the sky was divided into two opposite worlds … blue sky, golden sunlight and tranquility; … [and] a menacing curtain of boiling black dust.”11 One boy, playing with a friend in Hays, Kansas, ran for home but couldn’t out-pace the storm—the next day he was found smothered to death by dust. Little wonder that many fled the Dust Bowl. The storms were an implacable enemy that attacked residents’ economic livelihood, health, and safety, and threatened daily life.

但有些人留下来了。卡罗琳·亨德森 (Caroline Henderson) 是在最黑暗的日子里继续生活在该地区的大约 10 个人中的 7 人之一。12 1935 年 4 月,她写了一封题为“吃的灰尘”的信,并发送给富兰克林·德拉诺·罗斯福的农业部长亨利·华莱士(来源6.2))。在这封冗长的信中,人们明白了为什么亨德森因向她的同时代人讲述了沙尘暴居民的经历和勇气而受到赞誉。亨德森描述了她 27 年自耕农生涯中发生的“奇妙”变化,“连绵不绝的水牛草皮已经让位于耕地”,杰斐逊式自耕农生活的梦想似乎触手可及。但当干旱和沙尘来袭时,“日常的身体折磨、精神混乱和勇气的逐渐消磨”威胁要摧毁这个梦想。亨德森声称风暴的“痛苦现实……和剧烈不适”难以形容,但她继续生动地描述了它们的日常细节。

Yet some stayed. Caroline Henderson was one of the approximately 7 of 10 people who continued to live in the region during its blackest days.12 In April 1935, she penned a letter entitled “Dust to Eat” and sent it to Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s Secretary of Agriculture, Henry Wallace (Source 6.2). In the lengthy letter, one sees why Henderson was credited with informing her contemporaries about the Dust Bowl residents’ experiences and courage. Henderson wrote of the “marvelous” changes that had occurred in her 27 years as a homesteader, where “unbroken buffalo grass sod has given way to cultivated fields,” and dreams of a Jeffersonian yeoman farmer’s life seemed within reach. But when drought and dust came, the “daily physical torture, confusion of mind, [and] gradual wearing down of courage” threatened to destroy that dream. Henderson claimed the “bitter reality … and violent discomfort” of the storms were too great to describe, but she goes on to write vividly of their daily details.

亨德森描述了将平原转变为农场所付出的希望和努力,描述了沙尘暴造成的灾难以及政府对这场灾难的反应,并以希望结束——这种希望与她的记忆相结合,让她坚定不移。农场。她对联邦政府对该地区的援助表示赞赏,并认为联邦政府防止了更多废弃的宅基地和农场的出现,这一说法后来得到了历史学家的支持。13

Henderson wrote of the hope and effort it took to transform the Plains into farms, described the disaster wrought by the Dust Bowl and the government response to that disaster, and ended with hope—a hope that, combined with her memories, held her on her farm. She applauded the federal government’s aid to the region, and credited it with preventing even more abandoned homesteads and farms, a claim later supported by historians.13

劳伦斯·斯沃比达 (Lawrence Svobida) 留下了他自己在沙尘暴中幸存的经历(来源 6.36.4)。1929年,斯沃比达在堪萨斯州西南角的米德县(距亨德森不远)定居。他只会停留足够长的时间来经历最严重的灾难。他 1940 年出版的书《耕种尘暴:来自堪萨斯州的第一手资料》,还描述了这场灾难及其造成的损失。“大风……砍断了植物……然后开始拔掉根部……” 他们吹走了表土”,留下了“几乎和混凝土一样坚硬的地面……” [这是]一股超出我最疯狂想象的毁灭性力量。” 斯沃比达关注的是对农民赖以生存的土地的破坏。他的叙述重申了其他人的说法,即绿色植物生命被消灭,该地区正在恢复到早期美国人所说的:美国大沙漠。

Lawrence Svobida left behind his own account of surviving the Dust Bowl (Sources 6.3 and 6.4). In 1929, Svobida settled in Meade County in the southwest corner of Kansas (not far from Henderson). He would stay just long enough to experience the worst of the disaster. His 1940 book, Farming the Dust Bowl: A First-Hand Account from Kansas, also described the disaster and the damage it wrought. The “gales … chopped off the plants … then proceeded to take the roots out…. They blew away the topsoil,” and left behind a ground that was “almost as hard as concrete…. [It was] a destroying force beyond my wildest imaginings.” Svobida focused on the destruction of the land that was the farmer’s lifeblood. His account reiterated what others said, that green plant life was wiped out and the region was reverting to what earlier Americans had called it: the Great American Desert.

那么忍受沙尘暴是什么感觉呢?尽管不像移民那样广为人知,但那些留下来的人的故事让我们以戏剧性的视角看到了我们原本会错过的过去。记者蒂莫西·伊根 (Timothy Egan) 在其 2006 年出版的副标题为《那些在美国大沙尘暴中幸存下来的人》的书中,将他们的故事称为“最艰难的时期”。这本书获得了三项大奖,证明了这些被忽视的故事的力量。

So what was it like to endure the Dust Bowl? Although not as well known as those of the migrants, the stories of those who stayed give us a dramatic view into a past we would otherwise miss. In his 2006 book, subtitled “Those Who Survived the Great American Dust Bowl,” journalist Timothy Egan called their story The Worst Hard Time. The book received three awards, testifying to the power of these overlooked stories.

沙尘暴产生的原因是什么?我们讲什么故事?

What Caused the Dust Bowl? What Story Do We Tell?

然而,关于这一事件还有其他故事可讲。历史学家讲述的故事可以解释事件发生的原因。第一手资料是这些解释的主要证据来源之一,亨德森和斯沃比达的摘录都让我们得以一窥沙尘暴的成因。

Yet there are other stories to be told about this event. Historians tell stories that explain why events happen. Primary sources are one major source of evidence for those explanations, and both the Henderson and Svobida excerpts provide glimpses into the causes of the Dust Bowl.

亨德森庆祝了她在平原看到的变化,那里的耕地取代了草皮,而新机械“彻底改变了农业工作方法”。另一方面,斯沃比达对同样的变化有不同的看法。他同意“电力农业”的重要影响,但称其为“平原的丧钟”而不是福音。他的回忆录讲述了七种农作物歉收的情况,而亨德森则在 4 年前撰写,当时她的土地耕种取得了成功。这些因素可能有助于形成他们对这种转变的不同看法,但两个故事都承认大平原发生了巨大的变化,而农业方法是主要原因。

Henderson celebrated the changes she saw in the Plains, where cultivated fields had defeated grass sod, and new machinery “revolutionized methods of farm work.” Svobida, on the other hand, viewed the same changes differently. He agreed on the important impact of “power farming,” but called it “the death knell of the Plains” rather than a boon. His memoir recounts seven failed crops, whereas Henderson wrote 4 years earlier, following success in farming her land. These factors may have helped to shape their differing views of the transformation, but both stories recognized that massive changes had occurred to the Great Plains, and that farming methods were largely responsible.

一份关于沙尘暴成因的当代报告也认同这一结论(来源6.5、6.6和6.7 )。1933 年 3 月,富兰克林·德拉诺·罗斯福总统上任时,沙尘暴正如火如荼地进行。1936 年 7 月,总统要求提供一份关于危机原因的报告,以便采取措施防止危机再次发生。大平原干旱地区委员会进行了一项“初步研究”,其中包括查阅现有记录,并对受影响最严重的地区进行为期两周的考察,从德克萨斯州狭长地带的阿马里洛到北达科他州拉皮德城。该委员会包括工程进度管理局和负责土地利用、农业和土壤保持的政府机构的领导。这是一个令人印象深刻的小组,由农村电气化管理局局长莫里斯·库克(Morris Cooke)担任主席,成员包括移民局局长雷克斯福德·G·塔格韦尔(Rexford G. Tugwell)和农业部长亨利·A·华莱士(Henry A. Wallace)。

This conclusion was shared by a contemporary report into the causes of the Dust Bowl (Sources 6.5, 6.6, and 6.7). When President Franklin Delano Roosevelt took office in March 1933, the Dust Bowl was in full swing. In July 1936, the president asked for a report on the causes of the crisis so that steps could be taken to prevent another. The Great Plains Drought Area Committee conducted a “preliminary study” that included consulting available records and taking a 2-week trip through the most severely affected areas from Amarillo in the Texas Panhandle to Rapid City, North Dakota. The Committee included leaders of the Works Progress Administration and government agencies in charge of land use, agriculture, and soil conservation. It was an impressive group, chaired by Morris Cooke, Administrator of the Rural Electrification Administration, and included Rexford G. Tugwell, Administrator of the Resettlement Agency, and Henry A. Wallace, Secretary of Agriculture. Such an esteemed delegation indicated that Roosevelt saw the Dust Bowl as an important national problem—as did the millions of dollars spent on conservation of physical assets and aid to the region following his inauguration.

1936 年 8 月底,该委员会向总统发布了他们的“个人机密”报告。其中包括重要的结论。四年的干旱并不是沙尘暴灾难的真正罪魁祸首。“过度种植、过度放牧和不适当的耕作方法”是罪魁祸首。“错误的公共政策”在很大程度上负有责任,包括国家的宅基地政策和鼓励错误的农业制度。(报告开头的两幅地图显示,大平原是一个“降雨量显着偏低”和“风速较高”的地区。他们指出,改变的不是天气,而是定居模式。和农业。)总统委员会发现,预防未来的灾难——确实,确保该地区的未来——将取决于“农业实践符合自然条件的程度”,而这些在几十年来一直严重失调。报告很明确:沙尘暴不是一场自然灾害。这是一个人造的。

At the end of August 1936, the committee issued their “personal and confidential” report to the president. It included important conclusions. The 4 years of drought were not the real culprit for the Dust Bowl disaster. “Over cropping, over grazing, and improper farm methods” were to blame. “Mistaken public policies” were largely responsible, including the country’s homesteading policy and the encouragement of a misguided system of agriculture. (Two maps, early in the report, showed the Great Plains as a region of “predominantly low rainfall” and “high wind velocity.” They made the point that it wasn’t the weather that had changed, but rather the patterns of settlement and farming.) The president’s committee found that preventing future disasters—indeed, ensuring the future of the region—would depend “on the degree to which farming practices conform to natural conditions,” and that these had been badly misaligned for decades. The report was clear: The Dust Bowl was not a natural disaster. It was a man-made one.

该报告包括以确定土地使用区域为中心的“行动方针”,这需要政府的参与和监督。哪个地区更适合耕种或放牧?哪些土地需要开垦为草地?哪种草最能保护土壤?需要重新考虑水权,地方、州和联邦政府必须收回私人土地,以规划和控制其使用。农民需要参与土壤保护,社区需要共同努力建设更可持续的土地利用区域。救济计划以及政府的参与和监管将有助于促进这些进步。该报告呼吁制定“协调一致的合作计划”并指出,“任何有价值的计划的根本目的都不是减少该地区的人口,而是使其永久适宜居住。任何其他结果都将是国家失败,其有形和无形的影响将远远超出受影响地区。”

The report included “lines of action” that centered on identifying land use regions, something that would require government involvement and oversight. Was an area more suited to farming or cattle grazing? Which land would need to be reclaimed as grassland? What kinds of grasses would best conserve the soil? Water rights needed to be reconsidered, and local, state, and Federal governments would have to reclaim private lands in order to plan and control their use. Farmers needed to engage in soil conservation and communities needed to work together to build more sustainable land use regions. Relief programs would help promote these advancements, along with government involvement and regulation. The report called for a “coordinated program of cooperation” and stated, “The fundamental purpose of any worthwhile program must be not to depopulate the region but to make it permanently habitable. Any other outcome would be a national failure which would have its effects, tangible and intangible, far beyond the affected area.”

对沙尘暴的解释主要集中在变幻莫测的天气上,对这些调查人员来说影响不大。该委员会的报告为一场人为灾难提供了令人信服的理由,这场灾难不仅是由个人定居者造成的,而且也是由不适合该地区的政府政策造成的。即便如此,该报告并不一定会改变每个人对这场灾难的看法。对于许多人来说,单是下雨就可以让平原地区的美好时光回归。卡罗琳·亨德森哀叹干旱问题的“一个令人满意的解决方案”“超出了人类的控制范围”,这是一种普遍的情绪。居民们祈求下雨,以扭转他们的命运。(当德克萨斯州达尔哈特的居民试图炸毁云层以迫使降雨时,至少有一个社区采取了行动。)14

Explanations for the Dust Bowl that focused on the vagaries of weather held little sway for these investigators. The committee’s report made a compelling case for a man-made disaster, wrought not only by individual settlers, but also by government policies ill-suited to the region. Even so, the report did not necessarily change everyone’s views of the catastrophe. For many people, rain alone could spell a return of good times to the Plains. Caroline Henderson’s lament that the “one satisfactory solution” to the problem of drought “is beyond all human control” was a common sentiment. Residents prayed for rain to turn their fortunes around. (At least one community took matters into their hands when residents of Dalhart, Texas, tried dynamiting the clouds in order to force rain from them.)14

报告提出了“行动方针”,并呼吁各级政府在“农业实践重组”方面进行合作,表明解决危机的办法不仅仅是等待下雨。从这方面来说,它可以被解读为一份充满希望的文件,就像卡罗琳·亨德森在最黑暗的风暴中保持希望一样。通过开垦、土壤保持和协调努力,可以更明智地耕种平原,使其永久适宜居住。如果做不到这一点,那就是“国家的失败”。

With its “lines of action” and call for government at all levels to cooperate on the “reorganization of farming practices,” the report suggested that solutions to the crisis existed beyond waiting for rain. In that respect, it can be read as a hopeful document, just as Caroline Henderson held onto hope through the darkest storms. The Plains could be farmed more wisely and made permanently habitable through reclamation, soil conservation, and coordinated efforts. Anything less would be a “national failure.”

事实上,沙尘暴事件不仅引起了联邦政府的调查。国家基金和计划的设立是为了缓解居民的困难并支持合理利用土地。应用于该地区的第一个政府计划是由国会发起的饲料和种子贷款基金,在红十字会被证明不足以完成这项任务后,赫伯特·胡佛总统不情愿地批准了这项计划。普莱恩斯选民知道需要更多帮助,他们在 1932 年一反常态地投票给民主党,帮助选举了罗斯福。罗斯福在危机的围困下,在上任的头100天内通过了一系列新政计划。虽然他们都没有直接针对沙尘暴地区,但他们建立了机构——最著名的是农业调整管理局(AAA)——来监督后来的努力。

Indeed, the Dust Bowl had not only attracted investigation by the federal government. National funds and programs were set up to ease the hardship of residents and support wise use of the land. The first government program applied to the region was a feed-and-seed loan fund initiated by Congress and reluctantly approved by President Herbert Hoover after the Red Cross had proven inadequate to the task. Plains voters, who knew that more help was needed, uncharacteristically voted Democrat in 1932, helping to elect Roosevelt. Besieged by crises, Roosevelt passed a flurry of New Deal programs in his first 100 days. While none of them directly targeted the Dust Bowl region, they established agencies—most notably the Agricultural Adjustment Administration (AAA)—that would oversee later efforts. When drought conditions worsened dramatically and the huge dust storm of May 24, 1934, hit the East Coast, national efforts accelerated.

1934 年 6 月,罗斯福通过了一项价值 5.25 亿美元的干旱救助计划,其中包括以紧急贷款、收入补贴、就业计划和政府购买牛的形式向农民和牧民提供援助。农民和牧民也因减少产量而获得报酬。其中包括用于收购土地并将其退还草地、重新安置居民以及建立树木防护林的资金。这种援助将持续整个十年,但减产付款除外,最高法院在 1936 年认为这种做法违宪。(随后的努力转向支持种植土壤保持植物和消除消耗土壤的作物。)

In June 1934, Roosevelt got a $525 million drought relief package passed that included aid to farmers and cattlemen in the form of emergency loans, income supplements, job programs, and government purchase of cattle. Farmers and cattlemen were also paid for reducing production. Included were monies to acquire lands and return them to grass, relocate residents, and create a shelterbelt of trees. Such aid would continue throughout the decade, with the notable exception of payments for production reduction, which were deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 1936. (Subsequent efforts shifted to support for planting soil-conserving plants and eliminating soil-depleting crops.)

农民获得了保护土壤以种植未来农作物的援助。正如斯沃比达所描述的,剥离上市——垂直于风向犁深犁沟以尽量减少风吹——是实现这一目标的核心策略。支持脱衣上市的联邦资金通过当地机构到达农民手中。这意味着即使在最严重的干旱年份农民也有工作。

Farmers received aid to conserve their soil for future crops. As Svobida described, strip listing—plowing deep furrows perpendicular to the winds to minimize blowing—was a core strategy for doing this. Federal monies to support strip listing passed through local institutions into farmers’ hands. This meant that farmers had work even during the worst drought years.

联邦对平原地区的援助持续了整个 20 世纪 30 年代。一般来说,联邦计划有两个主要目的:使该地区恢复到以前的生产和繁荣水平,以及保存和保护土地。总而言之,此类援助意味着平原居民获得的人均援助与大萧条期间该国任何群体一样多或更多。

Federal aid to the Plains area persisted throughout the 1930s. Generally, the Federal programs had two main purposes: restoring the area to former levels of production and prosperity, and conserving and protecting the land. In combination, such aid meant that Plains residents received as much or more per capita than any group in the country during the Great Depression.

人们顺应自然。沙尘暴是一场自然灾害,是恶劣气候条件造成的吗?还是人们的行为导致了这场悲剧?政府 1936 年的报告对原因的描述正确吗?政府政策和行动在“肮脏的30年代”的形成和管理中发挥了什么作用?

People Acted on Nature. Was the Dust Bowl a natural disaster, the result of severe climate conditions? Or did people’s actions cause this tragedy? Was the government’s 1936 report right in its characterization of causes? What role did government policies and actions play in making and managing the “dirty ’30s”?

历史学家在其中一些问题上达成了一致,但在其他问题上仍然存在争论。第一个问题可能是最简单的。哈利·C·麦克迪恩 (Harry C. McDean) 在 1986 年发表的一篇题​​为“沙尘暴史学”的文章中指出了现代历史学家的共识,“沙尘暴不是一场自然灾害;而是一场灾难”。这是人类对自然的所作所为造成的灾难。” 15

Historians agree on some of these matters, but debate persists on others. The first question is likely the easiest. In a 1986 article titled “Dust Bowl Historiography,” Harry C. McDean identified a consensus among modern historians “that the Dust Bowl was not a natural disaster; it was a disaster caused by what people did to nature.”15

人们到底对自然做了什么?历史学家唐纳德·沃斯特 (Donald Worster) 在其 1979 年获奖著作《沙尘暴:1930 年代的南部平原》中讲述了这些事件的引人入胜的故事(来源 6.9))。沃斯特的书的第二部分题为“尘埃前奏”,包括“是什么让地球团结在一起”和“Sodbusting”两章。这些标题是对一个以草为生的土地如何因过度放牧和粗放农业而被破坏的故事的速记。沃斯特写道:“一个古老而独特的生态综合体已被人类破坏,使人类无法抵御自然灾害,土地任由风吹走。这不是第一次大部分自然植被死亡,但这是唯一一次由于人类故意采取的策略而发生的情况。” 16

What exactly did people do to nature? Historian Donald Worster told a compelling story of these events in his award-winning 1979 book, Dust Bowl: The Southern Plains in the 1930s (Source 6.9). Part Two of Worster’s book is entitled “Prelude to Dust” and includes the two chapters “What Holds the Earth Together” and “Sodbusting.” These titles serve as shorthand for the story of how a land dependent on grass was destroyed by overgrazing and extensive farming. Worster wrote, “An old and unique ecological complex has been destroyed by man, leaving him with no buffer against the elements, leaving the land free to blow away. It was not the first time some large part of the natural vegetation had died, but it was the only time that it had happened because of a deliberate strategy carried out by human beings.”16

沃斯特的《从前》从地质历史开始,然后讨论了土壤发育、气候模式以及南部平原的动植物群。他提到史前人类和平原印第安文化,这种文化“在各个方面都接受草的首要地位”,并“表现出一种生态克制的模式”。17沃斯特将此与印第安人大部分被推入保留地后抵达的定居者的态度进行了对比。

Worster’s “once upon a time” began with geologic history, then discussed soil development, climate patterns, and the flora and fauna of the southern Plains. He mentioned prehistoric man and the Plains Indian culture, which accepted “in every way the primacy of the grass” and “showed a pattern of ecological restraint.”17 Worster contrasted this with the attitudes of settlers who arrived after the Indians had largely been pushed onto reservations.

直到内战结束后,南部平原才有人定居。直到1880年代,到来的定居者大多从事养牛业。命运瞬息万变:1880 年,牧民在屠宰场赚得盆满钵满价格上涨,但 1886 年的严冬使牛群大量死亡,85% 死亡。18沃斯特称这种命运的逆转是未来事物的预兆。平原印第安人战争的结束和 1880 年代初高于平均水平的降雨量将更多的农民带到了南部平原,随之而来的是该地区大规模但不均衡的农业经济转型。

The southern Plains were not settled until after the Civil War. Until the 1880s, the settlers who came were mostly involved with raising cattle. Fortunes changed quickly: In 1880 cattlemen earned high slaughterhouse prices, but the harsh winter of 1886 decimated the herds, and 85% perished.18 Worster called this reversal of fortune a harbinger of things to come. The end of the Plains Indian Wars and above-average rainfall in the early 1880s brought more farmers to the southern Plains, and with them, the region’s large-scale if uneven transformation to a farming economy.

由于农业的兴衰变迁,再加上坚硬的土壤、周期性的虫害和恶劣的气候,这些来到这里的人都难以谋生。许多人转向经济作物,尤其是小麦,破土种植更多农作物,希望能够盈利。1890 年至 1910 年间,农场数量和耕地面积猛增。1890 年,堪萨斯州、科罗拉多州和德克萨斯州 22 个县有 5,762 个农场和牧场,平均面积为 256 英亩。到 1910 年,农场数量及其相对规模增加了一倍。农场继续增长,1920 年平均面积为 771 英亩:到 1930 年,平均面积达到 813 英亩。19随着耕种的面积越来越多,越来越多的草皮被破坏。在经济好的时候,农民会种植更多的农作物来赚取更多的利润。在经济不好的时候,他们种植了更多的土地来弥补损失。

Those who arrived struggled to make a living, given the vicissitudes of farming, exacerbated by the difficult soils, periodic pest infestations, and hostile climate. Many turned to cash crops, especially wheat, breaking more sod to plant more crops in hopes of turning a profit. Between 1890 and 1910, the number of farms and amount of land under cultivation soared. In 1890, 5,762 farms and ranches in a 22-county area in Kansas, Colorado, and Texas had an average size of 256 acres. By 1910, the number of farms and their relative sizes had doubled. Farms continued to grow and in 1920 averaged 771 acres: by 1930, the average size reached 813 acres.19 More and more sod was busted as more and more acres were cultivated. During good times, farmers planted additional crops to make more profit. During the bad, they planted more acres to make up their losses.

大平原报告中的两张图片捕捉到了这些巨大的变化(来源 6.56.6)。第一个展示了平原的原始地被植物,主要​​是西部边界的草和树木,偶尔在东南部地区。该地区树木和木材稀缺,定居者必须用草皮建造房屋。20第二张图片展示了从 1879 年到 1929 年期间,用于农业的面积迅速扩大,从平原大规模农业定居之前开始,到灾难性的沙尘暴年份的风口浪尖结束。随后的30年,种植面积增加了一倍以上,绝对总面积增加超过6000万英亩!

These tremendous changes are captured by two images from the Great Plains Report (Sources 6.5 and 6.6). The first shows the Plains’ original groundcover, dominated by grasses with trees along the western border and occasionally in the southeastern area. Trees and lumber were scarce in the region, and settlers necessarily built homes from the sod itself.20 The second visual shows the rapidly expanding acres dedicated to farming, spanning the years 1879–1929, starting just before large-scale agricultural settlement of the Plains and ending on the cusp of the disastrous Dust Bowl years. The later 30 years saw cultivation increase more than twofold for an absolute total increase of more than 60 million acres!

创新的农业机械使破草和种植农作物的效率更高,并加速了土地从草地到农场的彻底改造。19世纪末的工业革命不仅发生在制造业,也发生在农业。农场变得更大、更像工厂,而机器取代了人力。钢犁更容易犁开坚硬的草皮,拖拉机取代了马来耕作,联合收割机等机器可以同时做几件事(收割和脱粒小麦)。这种农用设备意味着农民可以更快地耕种土地,并且花费更少的精力。

Innovative farm machinery made breaking the sod and planting crops more efficient, and accelerated the radical remaking of land from grassland to farm. The Industrial Revolution of the late 19th century happened not only in manufacturing, but in agriculture as well. Farms became larger and more factorylike, while machines replaced human effort. Steel plows broke the tough sod more easily, tractors replaced horses for tilling, and machines like combines could do several things at once (harvest and thresh the wheat). Such farming equipment meant that farmers could break and farm the land more quickly and with much less elbow grease.

更多的农作物意味着更多的利润。有些人将 1910 年代和 1920 年代称为“大犁耕期”。当第一次世界大战导致俄罗斯小麦生产停顿、国际粮食需求增加时,农民扩大了耕地,以满足战后持续存在的需求。整个 20 年代,小麦价格基本保持稳定,拖拉机不断耕种新田。1925 年至 1930 年间,农民“毁坏了南部平原 5,260,000 英亩的原生植被,这一面积几乎是罗德岛州的七倍”。21即使有如此多的农业生产,繁荣也并不能得到保证:农民面临着新机械的成本、微乎其微的犯错空间,以及随着 20 年代的到来,欧洲竞争的回归。

More crops meant more profit. Some have called the 1910s and 1920s the “Great Plow-up.” When World War I shut down Russian wheat production and increased international demand for grain, farmers expanded their fields to meet demand that persisted beyond the Great War. Wheat prices stayed mostly stable throughout the 1920s, and the tractors kept plowing new fields. Between 1925 and 1930, farmers “tore up the native vegetation on 5,260,000 acres in the southern plains—an area nearly seven times as large as the state of Rhode Island.”21 Even with all this farming, prosperity wasn’t assured: Farmers faced the cost of new machinery, slim margins for error, and the return of European competition as the 1920s roared on.

辉煌时代催生了一种新的机会主义者,他们依靠的机器可以一天耕几英亩,一次耕种数百英亩。这些机会主义者被称为“手提箱农民”,他们会种植庄稼,然后离开,依靠机会判断庄稼是否茂盛或枯萎。他们不是传统的美国农民,在他们家人居住的家园里工作,并以此为生。与更多的永久居民相比,这些佃农和缺席农民不太可能关心维持土地生产力或使用土壤保持方法。在最坏的情况下,手提箱农民只会减少损失并放弃耕种的土地,不采取任何保护措施。但事实上,诸如在农作物残茬下耕作、轮作田地等做法,

Glory times spawned a new kind of opportunist who depended on machines that could plow acres in a day and farm hundreds of acres at a time. Known as “suitcase farmers,” these opportunists would plant a crop and then leave, relying on chance as to whether the crop flourished or withered. These were not the traditional American farmers, working a homestead where their family lived and upon which their livelihood depended. Such tenant and absentee farmers were less likely to care about sustaining the land’s productivity or using soil conservation methods than more permanent residents. In the worst cases, suitcase farmers would simply cut their losses and abandon their tilled fields, applying no conservation methods whatsoever. But, in fact, practices like plowing under crop residue, rotating fields, and leaving bare stalks to stabilize the soil—all of which conserved the topsoil—were not common for many southern Plains farmers.

历史学家不同意。历史学家对沙尘暴的许多原因达成了一致,包括破坏草皮、过度耕作、农业机械化和缺乏土壤保护。但首先是什么导致人们参与这些实践呢?唐纳德·沃斯特 (Donald Worster) 认为,美国的资本主义文化最终导致了沙尘暴(来源 6.8)。“资本主义——工业化和前工业化——对地球的态度是帝国主义和商业化的;它的主导价值观没有教导人们对环境的谦卑、敬畏或克制。这是驱使美国人进入草原并决定他们使用草原的方式的文化动力。” 22

Historians Disagree. Historians agreed on many causes of the dust storms, including sod-busting, over-farming, farm mechanization, and lack of soil conservation. But what causes people to engage in these practices in the first place? Donald Worster argued that it was the American culture of capitalism that ultimately caused the Dust Bowl (Source 6.8). “The attitude of capitalism—industrial and pre-industrial—toward the earth was imperial and commercial; none of its ruling values taught environmental humility, reverence, or restraint. This was the cultural impetus that drove Americans into the grassland and determined the way they would use it.”22

唐纳德·沃斯特讲述了一个引人入胜的故事,内容丰富,描述生动,论证有力。这是一个历史故事,使用各种证据来解释沙尘暴。它与其他关于沙尘暴的描述形成鲜明对比,它将原因归咎于资本主义对利润的无节制的胃口。

Donald Worster told a compelling story, richly detailed with vivid descriptions and forceful arguments. It is a historical story, one that explains the Dust Bowl using varied kinds of evidence. And it stands in contrast to other accounts of the Dust Bowl by attributing cause to capitalism’s unbridled appetite for profit.

Worster 的书出版两年后,R. Douglas Hurt 的《沙尘暴》一致认为“人类的居住……以及……新农业技术的采用”导致了沙尘暴(来源 6.9)。23然而,赫特并没有将资本主义视为主要原因。相反,他讲述了一个相互关联的因素的故事,平衡了自然和人为因素,比如干旱摧毁了有助于稳定土壤的农作物,以及人类“对土地的技术滥用”。

Published 2 years after Worster’s book, R. Douglas Hurt’s The Dust Bowl agreed that “man’s inhabitation … and … adoption of a new agricultural technology” contributed to the dust storms (Source 6.9).23 However, Hurt did not identify capitalism as the prime cause. Instead, he told a story of interrelated factors, balancing natural and man-made elements, like the drought that wiped out crops that would have helped stabilize the soil, with humans’ “technological abuse of the land.”

这就是历史故事的本质。历史学家可以检验相同的证据并发现不同的证据正如他们可以针对同一事件提出不同的问题来阐明不同人物的经历一样。由于沃斯特和赫特等历史学家的工作,我们理解沙尘暴的含义的方式已经改变。此前,沙尘暴大多被定性为一场自然灾害,讲述了勇敢的农民在自然灾害面前坚持不懈,为我们所有人拯救了平原的故事。24其他人则将恶劣的环境视为人类创新和创造力的催化剂。25但沃斯特和赫特帮助改变了这一事件的视角。不是将自然视为作用于勇敢的定居者的主要推动者,而是这些定居者及其文化作用于自然。根据这种观点,造成我们与沙尘暴联系在一起的痛苦的是人类的傲慢,而不是大自然的善变。

Such is the nature of stories in history. Historians can examine the same evidence and find different meanings in it, just as they can ask different questions about the same event to illuminate varied characters’ experiences. Because of the work of historians like Worster and Hurt, how we understand the meaning of the Dust Bowl has changed. Before, the Dust Bowl was mostly characterized as a natural disaster, a story of brave farmers who persisted in the face of natural disaster and saved the Plains for all of us.24 Others saw the hostile environment as a catalyst for human innovation and ingenuity.25 But Worster and Hurt helped change the lens on this event. Rather than casting nature as the primary agent that acted upon the brave settlers, it was those same settlers and their culture who acted upon nature. According to this view, human arrogance, not Mother Nature’s fickleness, caused the suffering we associate with the Dust Bowl.

《沙尘暴》是一个关于自然暴力的故事,还是一个勇敢的定居者在大自然的艰难时期中坚持不懈的故事?这是一个关于人类剥削土地、工业化失控以及不顾可持续性地使用农业机械的故事吗?还是政府政策如何加速剥削、监管或补救的故事?也许沙尘暴讲述了这一事件的特殊性,讲述了它如何成为一场由多种因素在这个特定时间、这个特定地点聚集而成的完美风暴。26

Was the Dust Bowl a story of nature’s violence unleashed, or one of intrepid settlers who persevered through nature’s hard times? Was it a story of humans exploiting the land, industrialization run amok, and the use of farm machines without regard to sustainability? Or was it the story of how government policies can accelerate exploitation, regulate it, or remedy it? Perhaps the Dust Bowl is the story of the particularity of this one event, how it became a perfect storm of many factors that came together in this particular place at this particular time.26

关于沙尘暴的故事有很多,其中有些故事比其他故事更好。有些人完全是错误的,因为他们没有证据支持他们的观点,并且与科学家和历史学家对该事件的了解不一致。其他人则根据相同的证据,在很大程度上同意这一事件的事实,但对于“导致”这些事实的原因却得出完全不同的结论。威廉·克罗农 (William Cronon) 写道,历史学家“将过去的事件配置成因果序列——故事——对这些事件进行排序和简化,赋予它们新的含义。” 27解释性故事需要连贯且统一的情节,要求讲述者对重要内容和应包含的内容做出选择。

There are many stories to be told about the Dust Bowl, some better than others. Some are simply wrong, as they don’t have evidence to support them and are inconsistent with what scientists and historians know about the event. Others alight on the very same evidence and largely agree on the facts of this event, but come to completely different conclusions about what “caused” these facts. Historians, William Cronon wrote, “configure the events of the past into causal sequences—stories—that order and simplify those events to give them new meanings.”27 Stories of explanation require a coherent and unified plot that demands that the teller make choices about what matters and what should be included.

就沙尘暴而言,这个故事讲述了人与自然如何相互作用并密不可分的联系。一方面仅仅关注 20 世纪 30 年代初的干旱,另一方面关注人类对干旱的反应,无法准确地描述平原上的这些不稳定时期及其发生的原因。人类与其赖以生存的地球之间的相互依赖引发了人们的疑问:我们珍视什么,以及面对有限而脆弱的生态系统我们应该如何行事。鉴于我们当前面临的挑战——气候变化、人口增长以及对自然资源的持续挤压——沙尘暴在很大程度上是我们这个时代的一个故事。它提醒我们,我们的行为会影响自然世界,并决定这个世界是否能够维持我们不断增长的人口,还是成为其受害者。

In the case of the Dust Bowl, the story includes how people and nature acted upon one another and are inextricably connected. Focusing solely on the drought of the early 1930s, on the one hand, or on the human response to that drought on the other, gives an inaccurate picture of these precarious times on the Plains and why they occurred. The interdependence between humans and the planet they live on raises questions about what we value and how we should behave in the face of a limited, fragile ecosystem. Given our present challenges—climate change, increasing population, and the ongoing crush for natural resources—the Dust Bowl is very much a story for our times. It reminds us that our actions affect the natural world and can determine whether that world will sustain our growing population or fall victim to it.

为什么要教授有关灰尘碗的知识?

Why Teach About the Dust Bowl?

多个故事并理解它们。故事引人入胜。它们是人类经验中持久的核心部分。我们讲故事不仅是为了分享知识,也是为了教导孩子区分是非、激励孩子并创建社区。引人入胜且难以抗拒的故事渗透到我们的生活中。

Multiple Stories and Making Sense of Them. Stories captivate. They are an enduring and central piece of the human experience. We tell stories not only to share knowledge, but also to teach the difference between right and wrong, inspire our children, and create community. Engaging and irresistible, stories permeate our lives.

它们是历史的核心。我们用故事来理解过去,历史课上很少有不分享故事的一天。但是,我们多久要求学生考虑特定历史事件中包含的多个故事呢?没有任何一个故事能够涵盖历史事件、人物或时代的全部真实情况。人类的经历太过多样和复杂。人们对事件的体验不同,动机可能是隐藏的且多种多样。

And they are central to history. We use stories to make sense of the past, and it is a rare day in history class when a story is not shared. But how often do we ask students to consider the multiple stories embedded in a particular historical event? No single story can capture all that is true about a historic event, person, or era. Human experience is too varied and complex. People experience events differently and motivations can be hidden and multiple.

研究沙尘暴提供了思考多个故事及其运作方式的具体机会。许多学生都知道俄克拉荷马人的故事,但很少有人考虑过那些留下来的人的故事。一个简单的问题,比如“当我们关注俄亥俄州时,我们错过了哪些故事?” 帮助学生认识到历史包括各种观点和经验。

Studying the Dust Bowl offers concrete opportunities to consider multiple stories and how they work. Many students know stories about the Okies, but few have considered the stories of those who stayed behind. A straightforward question like “What stories are we missing when we focus on the Okies?” helps students recognize that history includes a variety of perspectives and experiences.

作为解释和框架的历史。沙尘暴为何发生?解释过去是历史学家工作的核心,但这对我们的学生来说并不一定显而易见。唐纳德·沃斯特 (Donald Worster) 和 R. 道格拉斯·赫特 (R. Douglas Hurt) 等历史学家撰写的故事解释了他们调查的事件的相互关联的原因。过去,沙尘暴经常被描述为一场自然灾害,无论人们在该地区定居和耕作的方式如何,这场自然灾害都会发生。然而,随着历史学家更仔细地研究定居者的放牧和耕作方式、气候记录、政府政策和立法以及共同的信仰和价值观,这个故事被推翻了。学生可以了解到历史解释而不仅仅是描述事件。

History as Explanation and Framing. Why did the Dust Bowl happen? Explaining the past is central to the historian’s work, but this is not necessarily obvious to our students. Historians like Donald Worster and R. Douglas Hurt write stories that explain the interrelated causes of the event they investigated. In the past, the Dust Bowl was often depicted as a natural disaster, one that would have happened regardless of the way people settled and farmed the region. However, as historians have looked more closely at the grazing and farming practices of the settlers, at climatic records, government policies and legislation, and common beliefs and values, that story has been overturned. Students can learn that histories explain, rather than merely describe, events.

他们还可以了解美国历史的子领域以及历史学家如何使用独特的分析框架来研究过去。解释沙尘暴需要仔细观察人与自然世界之间的相互作用,这是唐纳德·沃斯特等环境历史学家关注的焦点。美国历史的子领域(例如环境史、军事史和妇女史)影响历史学家提出的问题和他们讲述的故事。

They can also learn about subfields in American history and how historians use distinctive analytic frames to study the past. Explaining the Dust Bowl requires looking closely at interactions between people and their natural world—the focus of environmental historians like Donald Worster. Subfields in American history (e.g., environmental, military, and women’s history) influence the questions historians ask and the stories they tell.

与科学和英语语言艺术的跨课程联系。探索沙尘暴是整合不同学科并在课程中建立跨课程联系的机会。学生可以阅读英语语言艺术中的《愤怒​​的葡萄》 ,同时研究那些留在历史课上的人的故事。可以强调小说和历史之间的差异,例如历史叙述和主张的证据依据的必要性。历史对解释的关注可以与斯坦贝克利用故事进行社会批判形成鲜明对比。

Cross-Curricular Connections with Science and English Language Arts. Exploring the Dust Bowl is an opportunity to integrate different subjects and make cross-curricular connections in lessons. Students can read The Grapes of Wrath in English language arts, while studying the stories of those who stayed in their history class. Differences between fiction and history can be highlighted, such as the necessity of evidentiary warrants for historical narratives and claims. History’s focus on explanation can be contrasted with Steinbeck’s use of story for social critique.

这个话题对于科学研究来说也已经成熟了。科学家和科学研究结成盟友,共同找出沙尘暴的成因以及预防沙尘暴的方法。风、气候和土壤模式对于解释沙尘暴都很重要。地理变化、农业科学和耕作技术影响了沙尘暴的范围和猛烈程度。可以检查土壤保护方法,并揭示和研究其背后的科学。学生可以更全面地了解活动,同时了解更多不同学科的知识。

This topic is also ripe for scientific study. Scientists and scientific investigation become allies in figuring out the causes of the Dust Bowl and the methods of preventing another. Wind, climate, and soil patterns all matter in explaining the Dust Bowl. Geographical variations, agricultural science, and farming techniques influenced the extent and ferocity of the dust storms. Soil conservation methods can be examined and the science behind them uncovered and investigated. Students can gain a fuller picture of the event while learning more about different academic disciplines.

促进对当代问题的进一步研究。我们正处于一场“绿色革命”之中,这是我们与地球关系意识的转变。为了当选,政治家必须在当地和国际环境问题上表明立场,而学区则必须采取节能措施并寻找绿色环保的方法。许多学生被环境问题和故事所吸引,并渴望了解更多。本主题及其相关材料充分利用了这种兴趣。作为 20 世纪 30 年代的一场严重环境灾难,沙尘暴让学生能够从远处思考人与环境之间的互动,减少热情可以提高分析能力和对复杂性的容忍度。这样的灾难是可以避免的吗?应考虑哪些类型的致病因素?我们可以从这次事件中吸取什么教训?

Prompting Further Research into Contemporary Issues. We are in the midst of a “Green Revolution,” a change in consciousness about our relation to the Earth. To get elected, politicians must take stands on local and international environmental questions, while school districts adapt energy-saving measures and look for ways to go green. Many students are captivated by environmental issues and stories and eager to learn more. This topic and the materials associated with it capitalize on such interest. As a severe environmental disaster of the 1930s, the Dust Bowl allows students to contemplate the interaction between people and the environment from a distance, where reduced passions can lead to heightened analysis and tolerance for complexity. Was such a disaster avoidable? What kinds of causal agents should be considered? What lessons can we learn from this event?

这些材料还可以促使学生调查更多的当代荒漠化问题。美国以外的案例研究,例如巴西的森林砍伐或《联合国防治荒漠化公约》赞助的努力,帮助学生认识到环境问题是国际社会关注的问题,并且环境悲剧不尊重政治界限。

These materials can also prompt students to investigate more contemporary desertification problems. Case studies outside the United States, such as deforestation in Brazil or efforts sponsored by the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, help students see that environmental issues are international concerns, and that environmental tragedies do not respect political boundaries.

您将如何使用这些材料?

How Might You Use These Materials?

场景 1(1 小时课程)。讲述了什么故事?在“打开教科书”课程中,28使用这些文件来加深学生对沙尘暴的理解,并帮助他们认识到教科书叙述的局限性。

Scenario 1 (1 Hour Lesson). What story is told? In an “Opening Up the Textbook” lesson,28 use these documents to deepen students’ understanding of the Dust Bowl and help them to recognize the limits of the textbook account.


CCSS

6–8 #2

9–10 #2、#9

CCSS

6–8 #2

9–10 #2, #9


布置作业以准备课程。读完教科书有关沙尘暴的段落后,学生应该思考:教科书讲述了这一事件的什么故事?

Assign homework to prepare for the lesson. After reading the textbook passage that addresses the Dust Bowl, students should consider: What story does the textbook tell of this event?

以这个问题开始课程,并要求学生使用具体细节来说明和详细说明教科书讲述的故事(工具 6.1)。许多教科书都关注俄亥俄人和其他因恶劣条件而离开该地区的人。一些教科书将沙尘暴描述为纯粹由干旱引起的自然灾害。使用适当的文档来“打开”这些故事。例如,学生可以阅读和分析来源 6.2、6.3和6.4 了解更多有关留下来的人的经历。关于原因,学生可以阅读和分析一些涉及人类对该地区影响的文件(选自来源 6.56.66.76.86.9)。无论哪种情况,学生都应该以以下问题为指导:这些来源为教科书帐户添加了什么?他们如何支持或质疑教科书的故事?他们讲述了哪些课本上没有讲述的故事?引导全班讨论来探讨这些问题,促使学生用来源证据来支持主张。最后,强调历史证据作为历史调查中持久常数的作用。

Begin the lesson with this question and ask students to use specifics to illustrate and detail the story the textbook tells (Tool 6.1). Many textbooks focus on the Okies and others who left the region because of the terrible conditions. Some textbooks represent the Dust Bowl as a purely natural disaster caused by drought. Use the appropriate documents to “open up” these stories. For example, students can read and analyze Sources 6.2, 6.3, and 6.4 to find out more about the experiences of those who stayed. Regarding causes, students can read and analyze some of the documents that address the human impact on the region (select from Sources 6.5, 6.6, 6.7, 6.8 and 6.9). In either case, students should be guided by the question(s): What do these sources add to the textbook account? How do they support or contest the textbook story? What story do they tell that is not told by the textbook? Lead a whole-class discussion that explores these questions, prompting students to back up assertions with evidence from the sources. Finally, emphasize the role of evidence in history as the enduring constant in historical investigation.

在课程结束时,让学生评价“历史上有多种故事和观点”这句话。指导他们使用当天课程中的信息和记录来加强他们的书面评估。

To close the lesson, have students evaluate the statement, “There are multiple stories and perspectives in history.” Direct them to use information and accounts from the day’s lesson to strengthen their written evaluations.

图像


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 识别历史记载中的故事和论点
  • Identifying story and argument in historical accounts
  • 通过检查历史证据使公认的故事复杂化
  • Complicating accepted stories by examining historical evidence
  • 考虑历史事件的多个故事
  • Considering multiple stories of historical events

场景 2(1-3 小时课程)。沙尘暴的形成原因是什么?利用这些资源让学生参与调查该事件的原因。

Scenario 2 (1–3 Hour Lesson). What caused the Dust Bowl? Use the sources to engage students in investigating the causes of this event.


CCSS

11–12

#3, #7

CCSS

11–12

#3, #7


通过投影照片(来源 6.1 )开始课程,并要求学生注意照片的日期、内容、看到云向他们滚滚而来时的感受以及他们对沙尘暴的了解。考虑为学生演奏 Woody Guthrie 的歌曲“So Long, It's Been Good to Know Yuh”。(您可以在 YouTube 上找到它,但请务必选择沙尘暴而不是二战版本。)然后介绍本课的中心探究问题:沙尘暴的形成原因是什么?

Start the lesson by projecting the photo (Source 6.1) and asking students to notice its date, content, how they might have felt seeing the cloud roll toward them, and what they know about the Dust Bowl. Consider playing for students Woody Guthrie’s song, “So Long, It’s Been Good to Know Yuh.” (You can find it on YouTube, but be sure to select the Dust Bowl rather than the World War II version.) Then introduce the lesson’s central inquiry question: What caused the Dust Bowl?

当学生提出原因时,将他们的答案列在黑板上。在连续三轮中,学生两人一组使用文档集和随附的工作表(工具 6.2)来帮助他们制定准确的原因列表。每轮文件结束后,带领全班同学在讨论中,您重新审视指导性问题,并提示学生用文件中的证据来捍卫他们的答案。使用学生在处理文档时产生的问题来强调历史挖掘如何导致更多问题。

As students generate causes, list their answers on the blackboard. In three successive rounds, pairs of students then work with document sets and accompanying worksheets (Tool 6.2) to help them craft an accurate list of causes. After each round of documents, lead a whole-class discussion where you revisit the guiding question and prompt students to defend their answers with evidence from the documents. Use questions that students have generated from working with the documents to highlight how historical digging can lead to more questions.

在第一轮中,学生使用 Henderson 和 Svobida 帐户(来源6.2、6.3和6.4)。在第二部分中,他们使用了 1936 年大平原干旱地区委员会报告的摘录来源6.5、6.6和6.7 。在第三轮中,学生考虑解释性二级帐户(来源 6.86.9)。最后,学生们写下这个问题的答案:“是什么导致了沙尘暴?” 他们的回应应包括证据,尤其是文件中的直接引用和细节,以支持他们的论点。

In the first round, students work with the Henderson and Svobida accounts (Sources 6.2, 6.3, and 6.4). In the second, they use excerpts from the 1936 Report of the Great Plains Drought Area Committee (Sources 6.5, 6.6, and 6.7). In the third round students consider the interpretive secondary accounts (Sources 6.8 and 6.9). Finally, students write an answer to the question, “What caused the Dust Bowl?” Their responses should include evidence, especially direct quotes and specifics from the documents, to support their argument.

图像


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 确定历史事件的原因
  • Identifying causes of a historical event
  • 认识历史上多重因果关系的概念
  • Recognizing the concept of multiple causation in history
  • 基于证据的思考和论证
  • Evidence-based thinking and argumentation
  • 综合多个账户
  • Synthesizing multiple accounts

场景 3(2 小时课程)。讲述了谁的故事?使用这些材料整合英语语言艺术和历史课程,并教导学生两者之间的重要区别。(这个场景最好与英语语言艺术同事合作执行。)

Scenario 3 (2 Hour Lesson). Whose story is told? Use the materials to integrate English language arts and history curricula and teach students important differences between the two. (This scenario is best executed in collaboration with an English language arts colleague.)


CCSS #9

CCSS #9


课前,让学生阅读约翰·斯坦贝克的小说《愤怒的葡萄》,至少读到第 10 章乔德一家离开农场的故事。以这样的问题开始课程:斯坦贝克的故事讲述了谁的故事?然后分发 Svobida 和 Henderson 文件(来源 6.2、6.3和6.4 ) ,这些文件是由 1930 年代留在家园的人们撰写的。询问学生这些故事讲述了谁的故事。这些叙述对您对沙尘暴的了解有何帮助?

Before the lesson, have students read John Steinbeck’s novel The Grapes of Wrath, up to at least Chapter 10 where the Joads leave their farm. Start the lesson with the question: Whose story is being told in Steinbeck’s tale? Then pass out the Svobida and Henderson documents (Sources 6.2, 6.3, and 6.4), written by people who stayed on their homesteads during the 1930s. Ask students whose story is told by these accounts. What do these accounts add to your understanding of the Dust Bowl?

将来源 6.2、6.3和6.4确定为研究沙尘暴的主要来源指出历史学家分析主要来源来讲述过去的故事。与他们分享历史学家的叙述之一(来源 6.86.9)。请他们指出摘录中的论点和故事。问:这位历史学家用什么来写历史故事?在他们确定必要的证据和来源后,询问斯坦贝克是否需要这些东西来写他的沙尘暴故事。使用这个例子来区分小说和历史。您也可以将斯坦贝克的小说视为主要来源,它提供了对事件和当时背景的洞察,但重申一点,小说和历史并不遵循相同的规则。

Identify Sources 6.2, 6.3, and 6.4 as primary sources for studying the Dust Bowl. Make the point that historians analyze primary sources to tell stories about the past. Share with them one of the historian accounts (Source 6.8 or 6.9). Ask them to identify the argument and story in the excerpt. Ask: What did this historian use in order to write a historical story? After they identify evidence and sources as necessary, ask whether Steinbeck needed these things to write his story of the Dust Bowl. Use this example to distinguish between fiction and history. You may also consider Steinbeck’s novel as a primary source that offers insight into the events and the context of the time, but reiterate the point that fiction and history do not follow the same rules.

通过要求学生写 1-3 段同意或不同意以下陈述来评估他们:“使用虚构和非虚构的资料可以帮助我们理解过去。” 学生应该表明立场,然后使用至少两个具体的支持例子来解释它。

Assess students by asking them to write 1–3 paragraphs agreeing or disagreeing with the following statement: “Using both fictional and non-fictional sources can help us understand the past.” Students should take a stance and then explain it using at least two specific supporting examples.

图像


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 识别历史记载中的故事和论点
  • Identifying story and argument in historical accounts
  • 历史与小说的区别
  • Distinguishing between history and fiction

场景 4(2 小时课程)。独立研究的跳板:使用这些材料推动学生利用引导性研究来阐述故事(参见工具 6.3)。

Scenario 4 (2 Hour Lesson). Springboard to independent research: Use these materials to propel students toward using guided research to elaborate a story (see Tool 6.3).


CCSS,

历史/社会研究素养,写作标准

#7

CCSS,

Literacy in History/Social Studies, Writing Standard

#7


使用前面的场景之一来介绍多个故事的想法。当学生认识到至少两个可供选择的故事后,让他们选择一个来了解更多。首先,让学生写一段话,讲述他们所知道的故事,并确定他们想了解更多的内容。然后引导他们访问资源和基于 Web 的档案,在那里他们可以了解有关这些主题的更多信息(要开始使用,请参阅“建议的资源”部分)。

Use one of the previous scenarios to introduce the idea of multiple stories. After students recognize at least two alternative stories, have them choose one to learn more about. First, have students write a paragraph telling the story as they know it and identifying what they would like to learn more about. Then direct them to resources and Web-based archives where they can learn more about these topics (in order to get started, see the Suggested Resources section).

要求学生找到至少三个来源来补充他们正在调查的故事。学生应该分析每个来源并确定其产生的时间、地点和原因;是二手来源还是一手来源;以及它如何支持、质疑或扩展他们阅读过的其他来源。29学生应记录他们在哪里找到每个来源以及分析中出现的任何问题。最后,让他们使用调查过程中发现的信息、引述和数据分几个段落重述这个故事,并引用具体支持证据的来源。

Ask students to find at least three sources that add to the story they are investigating. Students should analyze each source and identify when, where, and why it was produced; whether it is a secondary or primary source; and how it supports, contests, or extends other sources they have read.29 Students should record where they found each source and any questions that arise from their analyses. Finally, have them retell the story in several paragraphs using information, quotes, and data uncovered during their investigation and citing the sources for that specific supporting evidence.

图像


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 识别同一历史事件的多个故事
  • Identifying multiple stories about the same historical event
  • 寻找历史来源
  • Locating historic sources
  • 分析和证实来源
  • Analyzing and corroborating sources
  • 综合多个账户
  • Synthesizing multiple accounts
  • 根据来源建立对过去事件的叙述
  • Building a narrative of a past event based on sources

来源和工具

Sources and Tools

资料来源6.1:照片由JH WARD1935年4月14科罗拉多州巴卡县拍摄

SOURCE 6.1: PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN BY J. H. WARD, APRIL 14, 1935, IN BACA COUNTY, COLORADO


图像


资料来源:JH Ward,沙尘暴。科罗拉多州。照片。1935 年。来自国会图书馆,美国从大萧条到第二次世界大战:来自 FSA-OWI 的照片,1935-1945 年http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/fsaall: @field(NUMBER+@band(fsa+8b26995)

Source: J. H. Ward, Dust storm. Colorado. Photograph. 1935. From Library of Congress, America from the Great Depression to World War II: Photographs from the FSA-OWI, 1935–1945, http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/fsaall:@field(NUMBER+@band(fsa+8b26995)

 

 

资料来源6.2:HENDERSON信件(修改

SOURCE 6.2: HENDERSON LETTER (MODIFIED)


注:卡罗琳·亨德森 (Caroline Henderson) 教师于 1907 年开始在俄克拉荷马州潘汉德尔 (Panhandle) 种田,并在那里遇到了她的丈夫。卡罗琳是一位出版作家,为《实用农民》《女士世界》和《大西洋月刊》杂志撰稿。58 岁时,她写信给农业部长亨利·A·华莱士 (Henry A. Wallace),后者后来称赞她帮助美国了解农民的问题和勇气。

Note: Teacher Caroline Henderson began homesteading in the Oklahoma Panhandle in 1907, where she met her husband. Caroline was a published writer who wrote for The Practical Farmer, Ladies’ World, and The Atlantic Monthly magazines. At age 58, she wrote to Secretary of Agriculture Henry A. Wallace, who later credited her with helping America to understand farmers’ problems and courage.

 

 

【平原的变化】

[Changes in the Plains]

 

 

二十七年来,这片广阔的大平原上的这个小地方一直是我们所有思想、希望和努力的中心。我们所看到和参与的变化是奇妙的。

For twenty-seven years this little spot on the vast expanses of the great plains has been the center of all our thought and hope and effort. And marvelous are the changes that we have seen and in which we have participated.

几乎完整的水牛草皮已经被耕地所取代。早期简陋的小屋或防空洞已被相当舒适的房屋所取代。古老的小路已成为宽阔的等级公路。铁路已经建成,将我们到市场的路程从三十英里缩短到两英里半。小镇如雨后春笋般涌现,拥有迷人的房屋、树木、鲜花、学校、教堂和医院。汽车和卡车、拖拉机和联合收割机彻底改变了农业工作方式和生活方式。1926 年的丰收,仅我国就生产了 10,000,000 蒲式耳的小麦——据说比世界上任何其他同等面积的小麦都多——揭示了我们的土壤在现代耕作方法下的肥沃潜力。似乎我们的梦想终于实现了……

The almost unbroken buffalo grass sod has given way to cultivated fields. The small rude huts or dugouts of the early days have been replaced by reasonably comfortable homes. The old trails have become wide graded highways. Railways have been built, reducing our journey to market from thirty miles … to two and a half. Little towns have sprung up with attractive homes, trees, flowers, schools, churches, and hospitals. Automobiles and trucks, tractors and combines have revolutionized methods of farm work and manner of living. The wonderful crop of 1926 when our country alone produced 10,000,000 bushels of wheat—more, it was said, than any other equal area in the world—revealed the possibilities of our productive soil under modern methods of farming. It seemed as if at last our dreams were coming true….

 

 

[吃尘]

[Dust to Eat]

 

 

然而现在,我们每天的肉体折磨、心灵混乱、勇气的逐渐消磨,似乎让那长久以来的希望变成了一场幻灭。因为我们正处在沙尘暴最严重的地区,“沙子当饭吃”不仅仅是一种比喻,而是一种日益严重的残酷现实的表述。除了那些已经经历过这些风暴的人之外,任何暗示这些风暴带来的剧烈不适的尝试都可能是徒劳的。

Yet now our daily physical torture, confusion of mind, gradual wearing down of courage, seem to make that long continued hope look like a vanishing dream. For we are in the worst of the dust storm area where “dust to eat” is not merely a figure of speech, but the phrasing of a bitter reality, increasing in seriousness with each passing day. Any attempt to suggest the violent discomfort of these storms is likely to be vain except to those who have already experienced them.

这种由风驱动的灰尘,像最细的面粉一样细,可以渗透到空气能到达的任何地方。“吃灰尘”,呼吸灰尘,喝灰尘。床上、面粉箱里、碗碟、墙壁和窗户上、头发、眼睛、耳朵、牙齿和喉咙里都有灰尘,更不用说在糟糕的一天之后地板和窗台上堆积的灰尘了

This wind-driven dust, fine as the finest flour, penetrates wherever air can go. “Dust to eat,” and dust to breathe and dust to drink. Dust in the beds and in the flour bin, on dishes and walls and windows, in hair and eyes and ears and teeth and throats, to say nothing of the heaped up accumulation on floors and window sills after one of the bad days.

牧场变成了荒芜的荒地,简陋的小房子周围的院子变成了尘土飞扬的荒凉景象……

Pastures have changed to barren wastes and dooryards around humble little homes have become scenes of dusty desolation….

 

 

【政府帮助】

[Government Help]

 

 

在这个面临严峻压力的时期,除了我们人民的持久品质之外,还必须归功于联邦政府的各种活动。如果没有提供一些此类援助,似乎可以肯定的是,大部分地区实际上都已被废弃……。

In this time of severe stress, next to the enduring character of our people credit must be given to the various activities of the federal government. Without some such aid as has been furnished, it seems certain that large sections must have been virtually abandoned….

然而常识表明,不再完全自给自足的地区不能无限期地依赖政府援助。所以问题依然存在,唯一令人满意的解决方案超出了人类的控制范围。我们的一些带着小孩的邻居担心影响他们的健康,暂时离开“直到下雨”。其他人则永久离开,无疑认为没有什么比这更糟糕了。到目前为止,我们和我们的大多数朋友似乎——无论好坏——都被记忆和希望所束缚。

Yet common sense suggests that the regions which are no longer entirely self-supporting cannot rely indefinitely upon government aid. So the problem remains and the one satisfactory solution is beyond all human control. Some of our neighbors with small children, fearing the effects upon their health, have left temporarily “until it rains.” Others have left permanently, thinking doubtless that nothing could be worse. Thus far we and most of our friends seem held—for better or for worse—by memory and hope.


资料来源:摘自卡罗琳·亨德森 (Caroline Henderson) 于 1935 年 7 月 26 日从俄克拉荷马州狭长地带致美国农业部长亨利·A·华莱士 (Henry A. Wallace) 的信。阿尔文·O·特纳 (Alvin O. Turner)(主编),《尘暴来信》(诺曼:俄克拉荷马大学出版社,2001 年),140–142;146–147。

Source: Excerpts from Caroline Henderson’s letter to U.S. Secretary of Agriculture, Henry A. Wallace, sent July 26, 1935, from the Oklahoma Panhandle. In Alvin O. Turner (Ed.), Letters from the Dust Bowl (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2001), 140–142; 146–147.


字库

WORD BANK


广阔——区域

expanses—areas

marvelous——美妙的、伟大的

marvelous—wonderful, great

渗透——进入、闯入

penetrates—enters, breaks in

积累——收集

accumulation—collection

贫瘠——生产力低下、空虚

barren—unproductive, empty

荒凉——痛苦、悲伤、绝望

desolation—misery, sadness, despair

持久——稳定、持续

enduring—stable, continuing

无限期地——永远

indefinitely—forever


资料来源6.3:S VOBIDA账户(修改后

SOURCE 6.3: SVOBIDA ACCOUNT (MODIFIED)


注:劳伦斯·斯沃比达 (Lawrence Svobida) 是一位年轻农民,1929 年来到俄克拉荷马州,一直务农至 1939 年。8 年间,他遭遇了 7 次农作物歉收。当他离开时,他写下了自己的挣扎的“真实内部记录”。他想分享“普通农民”的故事,而不是像他声称其他人那样粉饰它。

Note: Lawrence Svobida was a young farmer who came to Oklahoma in 1929 and farmed there until 1939. He suffered seven crop failures in 8 years. When he left, he wrote what he called a “true inside account” of his struggles. He wanted to share the story of the “average farmer” without sugar-coating it, as he claimed others had.

 

 

大风植物连地面都刮掉了,然后把根拔掉了。他们并没有就此止步。他们吹走了肥沃的表土,使底土暴露在外:然后继续扫除几乎和混凝土一样坚硬的“硬土”。

The gales chopped off the plants even with the ground, then proceeded to take the roots out. They did not stop there. They blew away the rich topsoil, leaving the subsoil exposed: and then kept sweeping away at the “hard-pan,” which is almost as hard as concrete.

这是一种全新的、不同于我以前经历过的一切——一种超出我最疯狂想象的破坏性力量。当我自己的一些领域开始刮风时,我完全困惑了。

This was something new and different from anything I had ever experienced before—a destroying force beyond my wildest imaginings. When some of my own fields started blowing, I was utterly bewildered.

我向一些经验丰富的邻居提出了建议,但他们却没有得到多少鼓励。根据他们的信息,一旦土地开始刮风,挽救农作物的希望就很小了。唯一已知的检查土壤移动的方法是条带清单的做法。这意味着在东西方向上,相距二十或三十英尺,横穿盛行风的路径,铺设深深平行犁沟。这往往会抑制沿地面的风的力量,并使细小的淤泥状灰尘落入开放的犁沟中。

I took counsel with some of my neighbors who had had greater experience, but received little in the way of encouragement. According to their information, there was little hope of saving a crop once the land had started blowing; and the only known method of checking the movement of the soil was the practice of strip listing. This meant running deep parallel furrows twenty or thirty feet apart, in an east and west direction, across the path of the prevailing winds. This tends to check the force of the wind along the ground, and allows the fine siltlike dust to fall into the open furrows.

该地区的每个人都抓住了这个挽救庄稼的微小机会。

Everyone in the region grasped at this slim chance to save a crop.


资料来源:摘自劳伦斯·斯沃比达 (Lawrence Svobida),《种植沙尘暴:来自堪萨斯州的第一手资料》,首次出版于 1940 年(劳伦斯:堪萨斯大学出版社,1986 年),59。

Source: Excerpt from Lawrence Svobida, Farming the Dust Bowl: A First-Hand Account from Kansas, first published in 1940 (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1986), 59.


字库

WORD BANK


gales——强风、暴风雨

gales—strong winds, windstorms

迷茫——困惑

bewildered—confused

沟渠——沟渠、凹槽

furrows—trenches, grooves

普遍的——通常,主要

prevailing—usual, main


资料来源6.4:《S VOBIDA ON Nature 修改版

SOURCE 6.4: SVOBIDA ON NATURE (MODIFIED)


在定居者到来和铁丝网入侵之前,这里一直处于过度放牧状态,但随着动力农业的引入和迅速改进,平原的丧钟已经敲响,美国大沙漠的诞生也拉开了序幕。拖拉机和联合收割机使大平原地区成为了一个新的小麦帝国,但这样做破坏了自然的平衡,自然正在报复。

Here had been overgrazing before the coming of the settlers and the invasion of barbed wire, but the death knell of the Plains was sounded and the birth of the Great American Desert was inaugurated with the introduction and rapid improvement of power farming. Tractors and combines made of the Great Plains regions a new wheat empire, but in doing so they disturbed nature’s balance, and nature is taking revenge.


资料来源:摘自劳伦斯·斯沃比达 (Lawrence Svobida),《种植沙尘暴:来自堪萨斯州的第一手资料》,首次出版于 1940 年(劳伦斯:堪萨斯大学出版社,1986 年),36。

Source: Excerpt from Lawrence Svobida, Farming the Dust Bowl: A First-Hand Account from Kansas, first published in 1940 (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1986), 36.


字库

WORD BANK


过度放牧——牛吃掉了太多的草

overgrazing—too much grass eaten by cattle

丧钟——宣布死亡的钟声或信号

death knell—bell or signal that announces death

就职——开始

inaugurated—begun


资料来源6.5:地图

SOURCE 6.5: MAP


注:罗斯福总统要求提供一份有关 1933 年沙尘暴成因的报告。此地图是该报告的一部分。

Note: President Roosevelt asked for a report on the causes of the Dust Bowl in 1933. This map was part of that report.

图像


资料来源大平原干旱地区委员会的报告,于 1936 年 8 月 27 日发送给罗斯福总统,由农业部和土壤保护局等八个联邦机构的领导人签署。Morris Cooke 等人,《大平原干旱地区委员会报告》(纽约海德公园:富兰克林·D·罗斯福图书馆,1936 年)。网址:http://newdeal.feri.org/hopkins/hop27.htm

Source: Report of the Great Plains Drought Area Committee, sent to President Roosevelt on August 27, 1936, signed by leaders of eight Federal agencies, including the Department of Agriculture and Soil Conservation Service. Morris Cooke et al., Report of the Great Plains Drought Area Committee (Hyde Park, NY: Franklin D. Roosevelt Library, 1936). Available at http://newdeal.feri.org/hopkins/hop27.htm

 

 

资料来源6.6:图表

SOURCE 6.6: GRAPH


图像


资料来源大平原干旱地区委员会的报告,于 1936 年 8 月 27 日发送给罗斯福总统,由农业部和土壤保护局等八个联邦机构的领导人签署。Morris Cooke 等人,《大平原干旱地区委员会报告》(纽约海德公园:富兰克林·D·罗斯福图书馆,1936 年)。网址:http://newdeal.feri.org/hopkins/hop27.htm

Source: Report of the Great Plains Drought Area Committee, sent to President Roosevelt on August 27, 1936, signed by leaders of eight Federal agencies, including the Department of Agriculture and Soil Conservation Service. Morris Cooke et al., Report of the Great Plains Drought Area Committee (Hyde Park, NY: Franklin D. Roosevelt Library, 1936). Available at http://newdeal.feri.org/hopkins/hop27.htm

 

 

资料来源6.7:委员会报告修改

SOURCE 6.7: COMMITTEE REPORT (MODIFIED)


注:1933 年,富兰克林·罗斯福总统要求提供一份分析沙尘暴成因的报告,以便采取措施防止再次发生。以下是该报告的摘录。

Note: In 1933, President Franklin Roosevelt asked for a report analyzing the causes of the Dust Bowl so that steps could be taken to prevent another. Below is an excerpt from that report.

 

 

尊敬的总统先生:

Dear Mr. President:

……委员会对大平原地区的干旱状况进行了初步研究,希望制定一项长期计划,使未来干旱减少灾难性……。

… The Committee has made a preliminary study of drought conditions in the Great Plains area with the hope of outlining a long term program which would render future droughts less disastrous….

由于降雨量不可能永久增加,除非防止过度种植、过度放牧和不适当的耕作方法,否则大平原的农业经济将变得越来越不稳定和不安全。没有理由相信大平原地区气候温度、降水和风的主要因素发生了根本性的变化。因此,该地区的未来必须取决于农业实践符合自然条件的程度。由于情况现在已经超出了个体农民的控制范围,农业实践的重组需要许多机构的合作,包括地方、州和联邦政府。

The agricultural economy of the Great Plains will become increasingly unstable and unsafe, in view of the impossibility of permanent increase in the amount of rainfall, unless over cropping, over grazing and improper farm methods are prevented. There is no reason to believe that the primary factors of climate temperature, precipitation and winds in the Great Plains region have undergone any fundamental change. The future of the region must depend, therefore, on the degree to which farming practices conform to natural conditions. Because the situation has now passed out of the individual farmer’s control, the reorganization of farming practices demands the cooperation of many agencies, including the local, State and Federal governments.

......错误的公共政策在很大程度上造成了目前的情况。这一责任必须通过新政策来消除。联邦政府必须尽全力弥补错误的宅基地政策、刺激 导致 过度种植和过度放牧的战时需求以及鼓励不能既永久又永久的农业制度所造成的损害。繁荣

Mistaken public policies have been largely responsible for the situation now existing. That responsibility must be liquidated by new policies. The Federal Government must do its full share in remedying the damage caused by a mistaken homesteading policy, by the stimulation of war time demands which led to over cropping and over grazing, and by encouragement of a system of agriculture which could not be both permanent and prosperous.


资料来源:摘自大平原干旱地区委员会报告,于 1936 年 8 月 27 日发送给罗斯福总统,由农业部和土壤保护局等八个联邦机构的领导人签署(斜体字已添加)。Morris Cooke 等人,《大平原干旱地区委员会报告》(纽约海德公园:富兰克林·D·罗斯福图书馆,1936 年)。网址:http://newdeal.feri.org/hopkins/hop27.htm

Source: Excerpts from Report of the Great Plains Drought Area Committee, sent to President Roosevelt on August 27, 1936, signed by leaders of eight Federal agencies, including the Department of Agriculture and Soil Conservation Service (italics added). Morris Cooke et al., Report of the Great Plains Drought Area Committee (Hyde Park, NY: Franklin D. Roosevelt Library, 1936). Available at http://newdeal.feri.org/hopkins/hop27.htm


字库

WORD BANK


初步的——首先,介绍性的

preliminary—first, introductory

渲染——制作

render—make

干旱——干旱天气时期

droughts—periods of dry weather

降水量—雨

precipitation—rain

清算——结算、清算

liquidated—settled, cleared up

补救——纠正错误

remedying—making right

刺激——鼓励

stimulation—encouragement

繁荣——经济上成功

prosperous—financially successful


资料来源6.8:历史学家的解释A (修改版

SOURCE 6.8: HISTORIAN EXPLANATION A (MODIFIED)


沙尘暴是二十世纪南部平原生活中最黑暗的时刻。这个名字暗示了一个地方——一个边界像沙丘一样不精确且不断变化的地区。但这也是一个具有全国性、甚至全球性意义的事件。一位在世界粮食问题上广受尊敬的权威……将沙尘暴的产生列为历史上三个最严重的 生态错误 之一……。沙尘暴只用了 50 年就完成了…… 它的出现是因为文化完全按照它应该的方式运作。美国人以无情、毁灭性的效率在这片资源丰富的大陆上开辟了道路。任何地方的人都无法比拟。当白人来到平原时,他们大肆谈论“破坏”和“破坏”这片土地。这正是他们所做的。有些环境灾难是大自然造成的,另一些则是无知或贫穷造成的缓慢累积的影响。相比之下,沙尘暴是一种文化的必然结果,这种文化有意识地、自觉地为自己设定了统治和剥削土地的任务……

The Dust Bowl was the darkest moment in the twentieth-century life of the southern plains. The name suggests a place—a region whose borders are as inexact and shifting as a sand dune. But it was also an event of national, even planetary significance. A widely respected authority on world food problems, … ranked the creation of the Dust Bowl as one of the three worst ecological blunders in history…. The Dust Bowl took only 50 years to accomplish…. It came about because the culture was operating in precisely the way it was supposed to. Americans blazed their way across a richly endowed continent with a ruthless, devastating efficiency unmatched by any people anywhere. When the white men came to the plains, they talked expansively of “busting” and “breaking” the land. And that is exactly what they did. Some environmental catastrophes are nature’s work, others are the slowly accumulating effects of ignorance or poverty. The Dust Bowl, in contrast, was the inevitable outcome of a culture that deliberately, self-consciously, set itself that task of dominating and exploiting the land for all it was worth….

沙尘暴的发生……是因为美国的扩张能量最终遇到了不稳定的边缘土地,破坏了那里已经形成的脆弱的生态平衡。我们谈论平原上的农民和犁以及他们造成的破坏,但语言不够充分。把他们带到这个地区的是一种社会制度、一套价值观、一种经济秩序……。我认为,资本主义是这个国家利用自然的决定性因素。

The Dust Bowl … came about because the expansionary energy of the United States had finally encountered a volatile, marginal land, destroying the delicate ecological balance that had evolved there. We speak of farmers and plows on the plains and the damage they did, but the language is inadequate. What brought them to the region was a social system, a set of values, an economic order…. Capitalism, it is my contention, had been the decisive factor in this nation’s use of nature.


资料来源:Donald Worster (1979),沙尘暴:20 世纪 30 年代的南部平原。纽约:牛津大学出版社,4-5(添加斜体)。

Source: Donald Worster (1979), Dust Bowl: The Southern Plain in the 1930s. New York: Oxford University Press, 4–5 (italics added).


字库

WORD BANK


生态—环境

ecological—environmental

错误——错误、错误

blunders—mistakes, errors

赋予——有天赋,资源丰富

endowed—gifted, resourced

无情——残忍

ruthless—cruel

效率——有效性

efficiency—effectiveness

灾难——灾难、悲剧

catastrophes—disasters, tragedies

不可避免的——不可避免的,必要的

inevitable—unavoidable, necessary

扩张性——展开

expansionary—spreading out

不稳定的——不稳定的,不可预测的

volatile—unstable, unpredictable

资本主义——一种以资本私有制为基础的经济体系

capitalism—an economic system based, among other things, on private ownership of capital


资料来源6.9:历史解释B修改版

SOURCE 6.9: HISTORIAN EXPLANATION B (MODIFIED)


大平原南部乃至整个平原的沙尘暴并非 20 世纪 30 年代所独有。自平原形成以来,干旱、植被缺乏和风导致沙尘移动。不过,消除任何一种因果因素都会显着减少或消除沙尘暴。然而,当这三个要素都存在时,尘埃就会飞扬。十九世纪初及之前,当水牛是平原的主要居住者时,干旱和草原大火摧毁了原生草丛,使土壤遭受风蚀。然而,在十九世纪后期和二十世纪初,其他因素导致了沙尘暴,特别是人类对南部平原的居住 和新农业技术的采用……

Dust storms in the southern Great Plains, and indeed, in the Plains as a whole, were not unique to the 1930s. Drought, lack of vegetation, and wind have caused the dust to move since the formation of the Plains. The elimination of any one causal element, though will significantly reduce or eliminate dust storms. When all three elements are present, however, the dust blows. During the early nineteenth century and before, when buffalo were the primary occupants of the Plains, drought and prairie fires destroyed the native grass and exposed the soil to wind erosion. Later in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, however, other factors contributed to dust storms—notably man’s inhabitation of the southern Plains and the adoption of a new agricultural technology….

许多因素促成了沙尘暴的形成——土壤遭受风蚀、干旱杀死了固土植被、持续不断的风以及技术进步促进了原生草皮的快速破碎。南部平原土壤的性质和干旱的周期性影响无法改变,但对土地的技术滥用是可以制止的。这并不是说机械化农业对土地造成了不可挽回的损害——事实并非如此。新的和改进的工具例如拖拉机、单向圆盘犁、谷物条播机和联合收割机,可降低犁耕、种植和收割成本,提高农业生产率。然而,新技术也有负面影响。生产力的提高导致价格下跌,农民通过开垦更多的草皮来种植小麦来补偿。与此同时,农民很少考虑以保护土壤的方式使用新技术。

Many factors contributed to the creation of the Dust Bowl—soils subject to wind erosion, drought which killed the soil-holding vegetation, the incessant wind, and technological improvements which facilitated the rapid breaking of the native sod. The nature of southern Plains soils and periodic influence of drought could not be changed, but the technological abuse of the land could have been stopped. This is not to say that mechanized agriculture irreparably damaged the land—it did not. New and improved implements such as tractors, one-way disk plows, grain drills, and combines reduced plowing, planting, and harvesting costs and increased agricultural productivity. However, the new technology also had negative effects. Increased productivity caused prices to fall, and farmers compensated by breaking more sod for wheat. At the same time, farmers gave little thought to using their new technology in ways that would conserve the soil.


资料来源:R. Douglas Hurt (1981),《沙尘暴:农业和社会历史》(芝加哥:Nelson-Hall),15, 30(添加斜体)。

Source: R. Douglas Hurt (1981), The Dust Bowl: An Agricultural and Social History (Chicago: Nelson-Hall), 15, 30 (italics added).


字库

WORD BANK


干旱——干旱天气时期

drought—period of dry weather

居住——搬入、占据

inhabitation—moving in, occupying

不间断的——不间断的,持续的

incessant—nonstop, constant

不可挽回地——永久地

irreparably—permanently

实施——设备、工具

implements—equipment, tools

补偿——调整,凑合

compensated—adjusted, made do


工具6.1开放教科书_ _ _

TOOL 6.1: OPENING UP THE TEXTBOOK


关于沙尘暴有什么故事?

What story is told about the Dust Bowl?

图像

  1. 教科书的故事与您读过的其他来源有何相似之处和不同之处?



    图像



  2. How is the textbook’s story similar to and different from one of the other sources you read?







  3. 在一个段落中,使用您今天读到的证据来评估以下陈述:“历史上有多种故事和观点。”
  4. In a paragraph, evaluate the following statement using evidence from what you have read today: “There are multiple stories and perspectives in history.”

工具6.2:是什么导致灰尘_

TOOL 6.2: WHAT CAUSED THE DUST BOWL?


假设:

Hypothesis:

图像

工具6.3研究的跳板

TOOL 6.3: SPRINGBOARD TO RESEARCH


  1. 列出您读过的有关沙尘暴的不同故事。







  2. List different stories about the Dust Bowl that you have read.







  3. A。选择一个您想更多了解的故事并将其列在这里。



    b. 写一篇短文来概括这个故事。









    C。写下您对这个故事的 2-3 个问题。(想想你还想知道什么以及你不明白什么。)







  4. a. Pick one story you would like to know more about and list it here.



    b. Write a short paragraph summarizing this story.









    c. Write 2–3 questions that you have about this story. (Think about what else you want to know and what you don’t understand.)







  5. 查找三个来源(文档、照片、视频)来帮助您更多地了解这个故事。为每一项填写下表。



    图像



  6. Find three sources (documents, photos, video) that help you learn more about the story. Fill out the following chart for each.







  7. 用 1-3 段重述故事。
    1. 包括您在调查中发现的信息、引述和数据。
    2. 引用该信息/数据/引用的来源。在句子末尾的括号中包含来源的作者和日期,使其看起来像这样:(作者,日期)。
  8. Retell the story in 1–3 paragraphs.
    1. Include information, quotes, and data that you found in your investigations.
    2. Cite your sources for that information/data/quotes. Include the author and date of the source in parentheses at the end of the sentence so that it looks like this: (author, date).

建议资源

Suggested Resources

http://memory.loc.gov/fsowhome.html

http://memory.loc.gov/fsowhome.html

美国从大萧条到第二次世界大战:来自 FSA-OWI 的照片,1935 年至 1945 年是来自农场安全管理局战争信息办公室的大量照片集。该馆藏是美国国会图书馆美国记忆网站的一部分,可以按主题、作者和地点进行搜索。

America from the Great Depression to World War II: Photographs from the FSA-OWI, 1935–1945 is an extensive collection of photos from the Farm Security Administration—Office of War Information. The collection is part of the Library of Congress’s American Memory site and can be searched by subject, creator, and location.

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/award97/ndfahtml/hult_sod.html

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/award97/ndfahtml/hult_sod.html

使用此网站帮助学生了解草皮房子里的生活与他们自己的生活有何不同。该资源是 Fred Hulstrand:《图片中的历史》收藏的一部分,记录了北部平原的定居情况,是对草皮房屋的精彩介绍,包括照片和描述。

Use this site to help students understand how life in a sod house differs from their own. Part of the Fred Hulstrand: History in Pictures collection that documents the settling of the northern Plains, this resource is a fine introduction to sod houses and includes photographs and descriptions.

http://www.kansashistory.us/dustbowl.html

http://www.kansashistory.us/dustbowl.html

沙尘暴历史包括精心挑选的主要和次要来源的集合,包括照片、数据图表和歌曲。这些可用于了解背景知识或进一步调查。

Dust Bowl History includes a well-chosen collection of primary and secondary sources, including photographs, data charts, and songs. These can be used for background knowledge or for further investigation.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/introduction/dustbowl-introduction/

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/introduction/dustbowl-introduction/

该网站由 PBS 系列“美国经验”创建,包括一段有关沙尘暴的短视频以及有用的时间表、课程计划以及论文和采访(包括唐纳德·沃斯特的一篇)。

Created by the PBS series American Experience, this site includes a short video about the Dust Bowl and a helpful timeline, lesson plan, and essays and interviews (including one with Donald Worster).

http://www.williamcronon.net/researching/index.htm

http://www.williamcronon.net/researching/index.htm

由历史学家威廉·克罗农 (William Cronon) 和他的学生编写和制作的基于网络的历史研究入门读物。包括阅读对环境史特别重要的资料(包括景观)的方法。另请参阅 Cronon 的主页,了解有关环境历史的更多资源。

A web-based primer on historical research compiled and produced by historian William Cronon and his students. Includes ways to read sources particularly important for doing environmental history, including landscapes. Also see Cronon’s home page for more resources regarding environmental history.

http://www.livinghistoryfarm.org/farminginthe20s/machines_01.htm

http://www.livinghistoryfarm.org/farminginthe20s/machines_01.htm

该网站对不懂农业的人很有帮助,它简要介绍了不同的农业机械以及它们在 20 世纪 20 年代内布拉斯加州如何随着时间的推移而发生的变化。解释很容易理解,并附有照片和主要叙述。

Helpful for the farming-ignorant, this site includes brief explanations of different farm machines and how they changed over time in 1920s Nebraska. Explanations are easy to follow and accompanied by photographs and primary accounts.

http://worldhistoryforusall.sdsu.edu/units/eight/landscape/08_landscape7.pdf

http://worldhistoryforusall.sdsu.edu/units/eight/landscape/08_landscape7.pdf

本教学单元探讨 20 世纪上半叶的环境变化问题。它由圣地亚哥州立大学和国家学校历史中心的一个项目“我们所有人的世界历史”网站制作,提供材料和背景知识,为这些变化带来国际视角,并包括解决人口增长、移民,以及拖拉机和化石燃料的日益使用。

This teaching unit explores issues of environmental change in the first half of the 20th century. Produced by the World History for Us All website, a project of San Diego State University and the National Center for History in the Schools, it provides materials and background knowledge for bringing an international perspective to these changes, and includes sources that address population growth, migration, and the growing use of tractors and fossil fuel.

http://www.howstuffworks.com/framed.htm?parent=dust-bowl-cause.htm&url=http://www.ciesin.org/docs/002-193/002-193.html

http://www.howstuffworks.com/framed.htm?parent=dust-bowl-cause.htm&url=http://www.ciesin.org/docs/002-193/002-193.html

本文写于 1986 年,提供了关于荒漠化的当代和国际视角。30它包括关于世界各地地被退化和消失的定义、历史概述和数据。

This article, written in 1986, offers a contemporary and international lens on desertification.30 It includes definitions, a historical overview, and data on the degradation and disappearance of ground cover for regions around the world.

http://newdeal.feri.org/

http://newdeal.feri.org/

由富兰克林和埃莉诺·罗斯福研究所赞助的新政网络提供了大量历史资料和其他教学资源,以帮助充实有关大萧条和新政的课程。在这里您可以找到 1936 年大平原干旱地区委员会报告的更完整版本。

The New Deal Network, sponsored by the Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Institute, offers a good collection of historical sources and other teaching resources to help flesh out lessons on the Great Depression and New Deal. Here you can find a more complete version of the 1936 Report of the Great Plains Drought Area Committee.

 

 


第7章

CHAPTER 7


罗莎·帕克斯和蒙哥马利巴士抵制运动

Rosa Parks and the Montgomery Bus Boycott

这是一个被无数次重述的故事:一位普通的职业妇女,一位裁缝,在漫长的一天的步行后感到疲惫不堪,在一个闷热的夏日午后等待公共汽车。当她登机时,她扑通一声坐在禁止的“白色区域”的前排座位上。公交车司机恶狠狠地喊道:“你们都让开,我要那些座位。” 1 42 岁的非洲裔美国女性罗莎·帕克斯 (Rosa Parks) 一动不动。

It’s a story that’s been retold countless times: An ordinary working woman, a seamstress, fatigued after a long day on her feet, waits for the bus on a sweltering summer afternoon. When she boards, she plops down in the front seat in the forbidden “White Section.” The bus driver menacingly barks: “Move y’all, I want those seats.”1 Rosa Parks, a 42-year-old African American woman, does not move.

在这一非凡的勇气行动中,罗莎·帕克斯(Rosa Parks)俯视了种族隔离制度,正如作家珍妮特·史蒂文森(Janet Stevenson)所描述的那样,“种族隔离制度的整个摇摇欲坠的大厦开始摇摇欲坠。” 2就像保罗·里维尔 (Paul Revere) 从波士顿出发进行午夜骑行,或者帕特里克·亨利 (Patrick Henry) 在下议院挥舞拳头一样,罗莎·帕克斯 (Rosa Parks) 的标志性举动已不可磨灭地铭刻在美国人的记忆中。但帕克斯和其他人物之间有一个至关重要的区别:她不属于这个国家的地主贵族,既不是新英格兰的工匠,也不是弗吉尼亚的种植园主。她是一位普通的黑人妇女,是木匠和教师的女儿。一个平凡的女人,做出了不平凡的事。一个简单而大胆的举动。

In this singular act of courage, Rosa Parks stared down the institution of segregation, and in so doing, as writer Janet Stevenson described the precise moment, “the whole shaky edifice of Jim Crow began to totter.”2 Like Paul Revere setting out from Boston on his midnight ride, or Patrick Henry shaking his fist at the House of Burgesses, Rosa Parks’s iconic act is indelibly etched in American memory. But there’s a crucial difference between Parks and these other figures: She was not part of the nation’s landed gentry, neither a New England craftsman nor a Virginia planter. She was an ordinary Black woman, the daughter of a carpenter and a schoolteacher. An ordinary woman who committed an extraordinary act. A simple yet daring act.

今天的学生已经听过这个故事几十次了,许多人都可以想象帕克斯夫人有尊严地坐在蒙哥马利公共汽车的前座上。2008年,来自全美50个州的2000名学生被要求说出“美国历史上最著名的女性,不包括总统的妻子”。罗莎·帕克斯的名字位居该名单的首位。3在过去 30 年里,有关她的传记数量几乎超过了学校课程中所有女性的传记数量。4

Today’s students have heard this story dozens of times, and many can visualize Mrs. Parks sitting with dignity in the front seat of a Montgomery bus. In 2008 2,000 students from all 50 states were asked to name “the most famous woman in American history, not including wives of presidents.” Rosa Parks’s name was at the top of that list.3 In the last 30 years, more biographies have been written about her than practically any woman in the school curriculum.4

在年轻人被指责不了解基本历史事实的时代,罗莎·帕克斯的故事是教师们可以依赖的基础。大多数学生都熟记这个故事。即使他们不记得主角的名字,他们也清楚地知道她是“公交车上的那位女士”。

In an age when young people are accused of not knowing basic historical facts, the story of Rosa Parks is a foundation teachers can depend on. Most students know the story by heart. Even if they can’t remember the name of the protagonist, they know her unmistakably as “the lady on the bus.”

只有一个问题:他们对罗莎·帕克斯的了解大部分都被神话和传说所扭曲,以至于很难了解真正的真相。

There’s only one problem: Much of what they know about Rosa Parks has become so distorted by myth and legend that it’s tough getting to the real truth.

图像

罗莎·帕克斯 (Rosa Parks) 的预订照片,1956 年 2 月 26 日,可在http://search.creativecommons.org/?q=rosa%20parks获取

Rosa Parks’s booking photo, Feb. 26, 1956, Available at http://search.creativecommons.org/?q=rosa%20parks

混乱从一开始就开始了,随着那决定性的一天的到来。让学生闭上眼睛,想象帕克斯夫人在等公交车。许多人都会描述阿拉巴马州的烈日让每个人都紧张不已,尤其是帕克斯夫人,她的双腿因连续 8 个小时的站立而感到疼痛。问题是,这一天实际上是 12 月 1 日,蒙哥马利正经历着反常的寒流,时断时续的降雨,气温降至 40 多度左右。5至于脚部疼痛,罗莎·帕克斯 (Rosa Parks) 一遍又一遍地宣称,这一天她并不比其他任何一天更疲劳。6尽管有这样的否认,教科书还是反复提到帕克斯夫人“脖子和背部受伤”或“她感觉不舒服”。7民权历史学家奥尔登·D·莫里斯指出,如果说她感到疲劳,那是因为剥夺了她基本权利和尊严的制度带来的道德和精神疲劳。8正如帕克斯夫人所说,“我抵制在公共汽车上和其他任何地方受到虐待,这对我来说是一件很平常的事情,而不仅仅是那天。” 9

The confusion starts right at the beginning, with the setting of that fateful day. Ask students to close their eyes and imagine Mrs. Parks waiting for the bus. Many will describe a beating Alabama sun that frayed everyone’s nerves, especially Mrs. Parks’s, whose legs ached from 8 hours on her feet. The problem is that the day in question was actually the first of December, and Montgomery was experiencing an unseasonable cold spell, with intermittent rain and temperatures dipping into the mid-40s.5 As for those aching feet, Rosa Parks declared over and over that she was no more fatigued on this day than any other.6 Despite such denials, textbooks harp on the notion that Mrs. Parks’s “neck and back hurt” or that “she didn’t feel well.”7 If she experienced fatigue, notes civil rights historian Alden D. Morris, it was a moral and spiritual fatigue from a system that had denied her basic rights and dignity.8 As Mrs. Parks put it, “My resistance to being mistreated on the buses and anywhere else was just a regular thing with me and not just that day.”9

当你问学生帕克斯夫人在公交车上坐在哪里时,叙述会变得更加混乱。蒙哥马利公交车有 36 个座位(不包括第一个座位),是为司机预留的(参见工具 7.1)。司机后面的 10 个座位被认为是巴士的前部,接下来的 16 个座位被认为是中间的,最后 10 个座位被认为是后面的。那么罗莎·帕克斯到底坐在哪里呢?

The narrative becomes more tangled when you ask students where Mrs. Parks sat on the bus. Montgomery buses had 36 seats, not counting the first, reserved for the driver (see Tool 7.1). The 10 seats behind the driver were considered the front of the bus, the next 16 the middle, and the last 10 the back. So where exactly did Rosa Parks sit?

如果您的学生像我们询问的数百名学生一样,您将得到所有三个答案:正面、中间和背面。建立这样一个简单的事实应该是轻而易举的事,但是当学生咨询“权威”,即百科全书和教科书等值得信赖的备用资料时,他们就会被带入更深处的神秘丛林。

If your students are like the hundreds we’ve queried, you will get all three answers: front, middle, and back. Establishing such a simple fact should be a cinch, but when students consult “authorities,” trusted standbys like encyclopedias and textbooks, they are led deeper into a mystifying thicket.

让我们从世界图书百科全书中的以下段落开始:

Let’s start with the following passage from the World Book Encyclopedia:

帕克斯是一名裁缝,因违反要求黑人坐在公共汽车后部的城市法律而被捕。她坐在公交车前排,不听司机的命令,让白人坐下。10

Parks, a seamstress, was arrested for violating a city law requiring blacks to sit in the rear of public buses. She had taken a seat in the front of the bus and disobeyed the driver’s order to move so a white person could sit down.10

世界图书百科全书将帕克斯安置在巴士前部。美国主要历史教科书《美国人》将她移到了另一个地方:“1955 年 12 月 1 日,罗莎·帕克斯……坐在蒙哥马利公共汽车‘有色’区的前排”,将她置于巴士中间。11另一本教科书指出,登机时,帕克斯夫人“在为白人保留的区域找到了一个空座位”,这意味着她坐在前面的“十个神圣”座位之一,这些座位是为白人乘客保留的,即使没有人船上有白人。12以及早期版本的《美国人》将帕克斯所谓的疲劳与她选择的座位联系起来:“经过一整天的工作后,她感到疲倦,所以坐在前排,这是为白人保留的。” 13

World Book Encyclopedia seats Parks in the front of the bus. The Americans, a major U.S. history textbook, moves her to a different place: “On December 1, 1955, Rosa Parks … took a seat in the front row of the ‘colored’ section of a Montgomery bus,” placing her somewhere in the middle of the bus.11 A different textbook states that on boarding, Mrs. Parks “found an empty seat in the section reserved for whites,” implying she sat in one of the “sacred ten” seats at the front, which were reserved for White riders even when no White person was on board.12 And an earlier edition of The Americans links Parks’ alleged fatigue with her choice of seats: “Tired after a long day’s work, she sat down in the front section, which was reserved for whites.”13

真相是什么?由于二手资料来源不能达成一致,也许咨询主要资料来源——最初的警方报告(资料来源 7.1)——就能解决这个问题。

What’s the truth? Since secondary sources cannot agree, perhaps consulting a primary source—the original police report (Source 7.1)—will put the issue to rest.

没有这样的运气。警方报告中描述的“白色部分”含糊不清,因为城市法规赋予司机调整白色座位数量的权力,以适应公交车上不断变化的种族构成。除了司机后面的 10 个座位(无论如何总是为白人保留)之外,中间座位的指定可能会根据任何特定时刻公交车上黑人和白人乘客的数量而变化。因此,该报告没有解决帕克斯夫人到底坐在哪里的问题。14此外,在审查警方报告时,一些精明的学生会质疑其可靠性:我们能相信阿拉巴马州蒙哥马利市两名白人警察在描述 1955 年违反种族隔离法的罪行时所说的话吗?

No such luck. The “white section” described in the police report is ambiguous, since the city code gave drivers the authority to adjust the number of white seats to correspond to the changing racial composition of the bus. Other than the 10 seats immediately behind the driver, always reserved for Whites no matter what, the designation of the middle seats could shift depending on the number of Black and White riders on the bus at any particular moment. Thus, the report does not solve the question of where exactly Mrs. Parks sat.14 Furthermore, when examining the police report, some astute students will question its reliability: Can we take the word of two White police officers in Montgomery, Alabama, in describing the crime of violating Jim Crow laws in 1955?

事实上,警方的账户是由举报这一违规行为的克利夫兰大道公交车司机詹姆斯·F·布莱克发起的。布莱克是否有任何动机夸大进攻?罗莎·帕克斯声称她与布莱克先生“有过往”。几年前的 1943 年,当她支付车费后拒绝下车并从后门重新上车时,他将她踢下了公交车,这种做法受到《蒙哥马利城市法规》的认可,但司机们却没有遵守。15事件发生后 12 年来,帕克斯夫人一直避免乘坐公交车。1955 年 12 月的那天,布莱克是否记得她,就像她似乎记得他一样?对她固执的记忆是否影响了布莱克对当天事件的看法?

In fact, the police account was initiated by James F. Blake, the driver of the Cleveland Avenue bus who reported the infraction. Would Blake have any motivation to exaggerate the offense? Rosa Parks claimed she “had history” with Mr. Blake. Years before, in 1943, he had kicked her off his bus when she refused to exit and reboard through the back entrance after having paid her fare, a practice sanctioned by the Montgomery City Code but applied irregularly by drivers.15 Mrs. Parks avoided riding his bus for 12 years following the incident. Did Blake remember her on that December day in 1955, just as she seemed to remember him? Did the memory of her stubbornness influence Blake’s perception of the day’s events?

布莱克的叙述被两名警察 FB Day 和 DW Mixon 记录。这些官员是否想确保官方记录证明帕克斯的逮捕是合理的?奇怪的是,他们报告的手写部分(大概是在被捕时写的)只是简单地指出帕克斯“拒绝服从公交车司机的命令”(来源 7.2)。然而,打印的报告澄清说,她“坐在公共汽车的白色部分”,而警察补充说,他们“也看到了她”。

Blake’s account was recorded by two policemen, F. B. Day and D. W. Mixon. Did these officers want to make sure the official record justified Parks’s arrest? Curiously, the handwritten portion of their report, presumably written at the time of the arrest, simply states that Parks was “refusing to obey orders of bus driver” (Source 7.2). The typed report, however, clarifies that she was “sitting in the white section of the bus,” while the officers add that they “also saw her.”

事实却难以捉摸。当学生将教科书和百科全书条目中的版本与警方报告中的单独陈述进行比较时,他们会看到最直接的历史问题如何变成一个混乱的谜题,而这个谜题并不总是通过返回原始资料来解决。

Facts elude. As students compare the versions in the textbook and encyclopedia entry with the separate statements in the police report, they’ll see how the most straightforward historical question turns into a jumbled puzzle, one not always solved by going back to primary sources.

帕克斯不顾司机的命令仍决定留在座位上怎么办?这是自发行为,还是民权领袖精心策划的?毕竟,帕克斯夫人是蒙哥马利全国有色人种协进会 (NAACP) 的秘书,并在迈尔斯霍顿的高地民俗学校度过了一个夏天,学习公民抗命的哲学和策略。16从这个角度来看,她的拒绝是一时冲动的决定还是蓄意的反抗行为?

What about Parks’s decision to remain seated despite the driver’s orders? Was that a spontaneous act, or had it been carefully orchestrated by civil rights leaders? After all, Mrs. Parks was secretary for Montgomery’s National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and had spent a summer at Myles Horton’s Highlander Folk School learning the philosophy and tactics of civil disobedience.16 Seen in that light, was her refusal a spur-of-the-moment decision or a calculated act of defiance?

有些学生会声称,如果他们能问帕克斯夫人,一切就都解决了。信息来源总是存在错误,但事件的中心人物——一位民族女英雄,第一位在国会大厦圆形大厅受到纪念的女性——肯定是可靠的,并且会解决悬而未决的问题。

Some students will claim that it would settle everything if they could just ask Mrs. Parks. Sources of information always contain errors, but the person at the center of the event—a national heroine, the first woman to lie in honor in the Capitol Rotunda—would surely be reliable, and would put unresolved questions to rest.

这样的假设也令人失望。

Such an assumption disappoints as well.

罗莎·帕克斯一生中无数次讲述了她的故事——在报纸和广播采访中、在电视上以及在为学童写的自传中。对这些记录的检查揭示了更多的矛盾和不一致,对于那些熟悉人类记忆的脆弱性,甚至熟悉他们自己难以回忆起遥远过去的事件细节的人来说,这并不奇怪。17在 1992 年与吉姆·哈斯金斯 (Jim Haskins) 合写的自传中,帕克斯夫人表示,登上公交车后,她“看到公交车中间有一个空座位,就坐了上去”。18五年后,在一本为小学生写的关于她的生活的书中,她报告说,在她被捕的那天,她“坐在后面的一个座位上”。19因此,即使向罗莎·帕克斯本人求助也无法提供明确的答案。

During her life, Rosa Parks told her story myriad times—in newspaper and radio interviews, on TV, and in autobiographies written for schoolchildren. An examination of these accounts reveals even more contradictions and inconsistencies, not surprising to anyone familiar with the frailty of human memory or even their own difficulty recalling details about events in the distant past.17 In the autobiography written with Jim Haskins in 1992, Mrs. Parks states that upon boarding the bus, she “saw a vacant seat in the middle section of the bus and took it.”18 Five years later, in a book about her life written for elementary schoolchildren, she reports that on the day of her arrest she “was sitting in one of the seats in the back section.”19 Thus, even an appeal to Rosa Parks herself will not supply definitive answers.

对于刚刚开始历史思维的学生来说,“罗莎·帕克斯坐在哪里?”这个问题是很重要的。有一种特殊的吸引力。问题很具体。学生不必通过晦涩的语言和抽象的问题来理解问题。尽管版本众多且教科书上充斥着错误信息,但答案是毫无争议的。帕克斯于 1955 年 12 月 1 日被捕,经上诉并被送交司法机关。1956 年 3 月 28 日,阿拉巴马州上诉法院。一份由控方和辩方双方签署的商定事实声明,其中包括一张巴士图,所有 36 个座位均已编号。该图将帕克斯夫人放在 12 号座位上,紧邻为白人骑手永久保留的“神圣十个”座位后面(来源 7.3)。

For students just getting started on historical thinking, the question of “where did Rosa Parks sit?” has a special appeal. The question is concrete. Students do not have to engage with arcane language and abstract issues to understand the issue. And despite its many versions and the clouds of misinformation perpetuated by textbooks, the answer is not in dispute. Parks’s arrest on December 1, 1955, was appealed and made its way to the Alabama Court of Appeals on March 28, 1956. A statement of agreed-upon facts, signed by both prosecution and defense, included a diagram of the bus with all 36 seats numbered. The diagram places Mrs. Parks in seat number 12, immediately behind the “sacred ten” seats permanently reserved for White riders (Source 7.3).

案件结案。

Case closed.

然而,正如历史上经常发生的那样,解决一个问题会带来另一个问题:罗莎·帕克斯拒绝让出 12 号座位时是否真的违法了?正如她在 1956 年接受电台采访时告诉西德尼·罗杰斯的那样,帕克斯并不这么认为。20

Yet, as so often happens in history, solving one question opens up another: Did Rosa Parks actually break the law when she refused to give up seat 12? As she told Sidney Rogers in a 1956 radio interview, Parks did not think so.20

根据《蒙哥马利市法典》第 6 章第 10-11 节,仅当后部有空座位时,司机才可以命令黑人乘客让出座位(参见工具 7.2)。21该守则规定:

According to the Montgomery City Code, Chapter 6, Section 10–11, a driver could order a Black passenger to relinquish a seat only if vacant seats were available in the rear section (see Tool 7.2).21 The Code states:

如果任何乘客在其所属比赛的指定座位上有空座,则应任何相关负责人员的要求而拒绝坐在该座位上的行为属于违法行为。22

It shall be unlawful for any passenger to refuse to take a seat among those assigned to the race to which he belongs, at the request of any such employee in charge, if there is such a seat vacant.22

对于黑人乘客来说,最关键的问题是车上是否有空座位,不包括“神圣”的前10个座位。换句话说,司机可以合法地命令黑人从中间部分移到后面的空座位上。但如果没有空座,黑人骑手就没有义务让出座位。

The crucial issue for Black riders was whether there were vacant seats on the bus, excluding the “sacred” first 10. In other words, the driver could legally order Blacks to move out of the middle section to an available seat at the back. But if there were no vacant seats, the Black riders were not obliged to relinquish their seats.

与城市法规不同,阿拉巴马州法规中的吉姆·克劳法不包含此类警告(参见工具 7.2)。它简单地指出:

Unlike the city code, the Jim Crow laws of Alabama’s State Code contained no such caveat (see Tool 7.2). It simply stated that:

负责任何车辆的汽车运输公司的售票员或代理人有权并被要求将每位乘客分配到该乘客所属比赛指定的车辆组。23

The conductor or agent of the motor transportation company in charge of any vehicle is authorized and required to assign each passenger to the division of the vehicle designated for the race to which the passenger belongs.23

与城市法规不同的是,州法律赋予公交车司机权力将黑人乘客从座位上移走,为白人腾出空间,无论这是否意味着乘客必须在剩余的旅程中站立。换句话说,州法律和地方法律之间存在差异。

Unlike the city code, the state law gave the bus driver the authority to remove Black riders from their seats to make room for Whites, whether that meant the passenger would have to stand for the remainder of the trip or not. In other words, there was a discrepancy between state and local laws.

当天下午是否有额外座位可供帕克斯夫人使用的问题使问题变得更加复杂。如果没有,那么司机布莱克至少违反了蒙哥马利的城市法规。阿拉巴马州上诉法院提交的案情摘要中规定的事实陈述指出,“关于黑人区是否有空缺席位的证据存在争议。” 24帕克斯夫人表示,当她拒绝让座时,她并不认为自己违反了法律。25如果后排没有空位,她的说法就是正确的——至少根据城市法律。

The issue is further complicated by the question of whether additional seats were available to Mrs. Parks that afternoon. If there were none, then driver Blake was, at the very least, in violation of Montgomery’s City Code. The statement of stipulated facts in the brief before the Alabama Court of Appeals notes that “the evidence is in dispute as to whether or not there were vacant seats in the negro section.”24 Mrs. Parks stated she did not believe she was violating the law when she refused to give up her seat.25 And if there were no vacant seats in the back section, she would have been correct—at least according to city law.

那么问题来了,这是自发行为还是精心策划的呢?在 1956 年的采访中,帕克斯夫人表示,她拒绝搬家是无计划和无剧本的。事实上,她认为自己没有违法的信念似乎证实了这一点。

What about the question of whether this was a spontaneous act, or one carefully planned? In the 1956 interview Mrs. Parks stated that her refusal to move was unplanned and unscripted. In fact, her belief that she was not breaking the law seems to corroborate this.

西德尼·罗杰斯:是什么让你在 1955 年 12 月上旬决定你已经受够了?

Sidney Rogers: What made you decide in the first part of the month of December 1955 that you had had enough?

罗莎·帕克斯:我想,我已经被推到了我能忍受的程度。

Rosa Parks: The time had just come when I had been pushed as far as I could stand to be pushed, I suppose.

西德尼·罗杰斯:嗯,帕克斯夫人,这是你计划好的吗?

Sidney Rogers: Well, Mrs. Parks, had you planned this?

罗莎·帕克斯:不,我没有。

Rosa Parks: No I hadn’t.

西德尼·罗杰斯:事情就这样发生了。

Sidney Rogers: It just happened.

罗莎·帕克斯:是的,确实如此。26

Rosa Parks: Yes it did.26

如果罗莎·帕克斯计划被捕,她很可能会选择一种更明显违反她反对的种族隔离法的行为。在后来的采访中,包括 1992 年在国家公共广播电台的采访中,她重申,她并没有计划被捕,也没有预感到接下来会发生的事件。27

Had she planned to be arrested, it’s likely that Rosa Parks would have chosen an act that more clearly violated the segregation laws she opposed. In later interviews, including a 1992 interview on National Public Radio, she reiterated that she had not planned on being arrested and that she had no premonition of the events that would follow.27

蒙哥马利巴士抵制运动的背景

The Montgomery Bus Boycott in Context

问题还不止于此。罗莎·帕克斯于周四晚上被捕。为何在周四至周一的短时间内,蒙哥马利的 42,000 名黑人公民能够组织抵制公共交通,并各自寻找替代的上下班路线?一场看似一时兴起的抵制活动如何赢得如此广泛的支持和承诺?有人能准确地说罗莎·帕克斯的行为“引发”或“发起”或“启动”了持续一年多的抵制活动吗?

Questions do not end there. Rosa Parks was arrested on a Thursday evening. How was it that in the short period between Thursday and Monday, 42,000 Black citizens of Montgomery were able to organize a boycott of public transportation, each finding alternative routes to and from work? How did a boycott that seemed to catch fire at a moment’s notice command such widespread support and commitment? Can one accurately claim that Rosa Parks’s actions “sparked” or “initiated” or “set into motion” the boycott that lasted for over a year?

当活动开始时,没有人确切知道抵制公交车是否会成功。蒙哥马利城市线路上的乘客大部分是非裔美国人。然而,帕克斯被捕三天后,没有一个黑人登上公共汽车。数千人以某种方式完成了工作,找到了接孩子放学、购买晚餐所需的杂货然后回家的方法。如此大规模的社会运动依赖于但又高于任何个人的努力,要理解它的力量和有效性,关键在于解开“某种程度上”这个词。

When it began, no one knew for sure whether the bus boycott would succeed. African Americans made up the majority of riders on the Montgomery City Lines. Yet, 3 days after Parks’s arrest, not a single Black person boarded a bus. Thousands somehow made it to their jobs and found ways to pick up their children from school, purchase groceries they needed for dinner, and make their way home. The key to understanding the power and effectiveness of a social movement of this magnitude, one that depends on but rises above the efforts of any one individual, lies in unlocking the word “somehow.”

蒙哥马利有着悠久的黑人激进主义历史,是社区动员的重要经验的来源。1900 年,即普莱西诉弗格森案对吉姆·克劳的“隔离但平等”规则给予法律制裁四年后,蒙哥马利市新的电动无轨电车线路上强制要求单独的座位,这是南方的第一个此类系统。28电车车主不喜欢这个想法,认为这不切实际并且会损害利润。

Montgomery had a long history of Black activism and was the source of important experience in community-wide mobilization. In 1900, four years after Plessy v. Ferguson gave legal sanction to Jim Crow’s “separate but equal” rule, the City of Montgomery mandated separate seating on the new electric trolley lines, the first system of its kind in the South.28 Trolley owners disliked the idea, believing that it would be impracticable and hurt profits.

已经太迟了。蒙哥马利卷入了席卷 27 个南方城市的浪潮中,其中包括诺福克、纳什维尔、新奥尔良、莫比尔、奥古斯塔、亚特兰大和休斯顿,要求在公共交通上单独安排座位。黑人曾试图抵制公共交通,但大多数都是零星的、参差不齐的。只有四个可以被称为成功:彭萨科拉、杰克逊维尔、莫比尔和蒙哥马利。事实上,蒙哥马利 1900 年的有轨电车抵制活动非常成功,以至于活动 10 天后,《亚特兰大宪法》报道称“黑人出行明显减少,抵制活动仍在继续。” 29三个月后,该报报道称,无轨电车公司的利润下降了 25%,而黑人骑手以“令人惊讶的毅力”遵守了抵制行动。30抵制电车活动持续了两年。虽然它没有击败蒙哥马利的种族隔离法(到本世纪中叶,独立住宿将成为南方生活的一部分),但它导致了一项妥协,并被写入蒙哥马利的城市法规:只有在有空座位的情况下,司机才能命令黑人骑手移动在后面。因此,蒙哥马利市法典和阿拉巴马州法典之间差异的根源。

It was too late. Montgomery was caught in a wave that swept through 27 Southern cities, among them Norfolk, Nashville, New Orleans, Mobile, Augusta, Atlanta, and Houston, requiring separate seating on public transportation. There were attempts by Blacks to boycott public transport, most of them sporadic and uneven. Only four could be called successful—Pensacola, Jacksonville, Mobile, and Montgomery. In fact, Montgomery’s 1900 streetcar boycott was so successful that 10 days into it, the Atlanta Constitution reported that “there has been a decided falling off in the travel of the negroes and the boycott is on.”29 Three months later, the paper reported that trolley company profits had fallen 25%, and that Black riders had complied with the boycott with “surprising persistency.”30 The trolley boycott lasted for 2 years. While it did not defeat Montgomery’s Jim Crow laws—separate accommodations would become part of Southern life well into midcentury—it led to a compromise that was enacted into Montgomery’s City Code: A driver could order a Black rider to move only if there were vacant seats at the back. Hence, the source of the discrepancy between the Montgomery City Code and Alabama State Code.

到 1955 年,蒙哥马利已成为黑人社区政治和社会活动的场所。仅在这座城市就有 68 个致力于促进非裔美国公民权利的组织。31其中之一是妇女政治委员会(WPC),由阿拉巴马州立大学的玛丽·费尔·伯克斯教授创立,由受过教育的黑人女性组成:阿拉巴马州立大学教职人员、护士、公立学校教师、社会工作者和其他专业人员。1955 年,WPC 回应了 30 多起关于黑人乘客在城市公交车上遭受侮辱的投诉,其中包括 15 岁的克劳黛特·科尔文 (Claudette Colvin) 的案件。3 月 2 日,距离罗莎·帕克斯 (Rosa Parks) 受到公众关注近 8 个月,布克·T·华盛顿高中 (Booker T. Washington High School) 的“A”级学生克劳黛 (Claudette) 拒绝给白人乘客让座,并被强行带下公交车。在这样做的过程中,克劳黛特·科尔文追随黑人女性——日内瓦·约翰逊、维奥拉·怀特、凯蒂·温菲尔德、埃斯皮·沃西——的脚步,因为反抗蒙哥马利城市线的力量而受到同样的虐待,有时甚至遭到殴打。

By 1955 Montgomery was the site of political and social activism in the Black community. In this one city alone there were 68 organizations dedicated to advancing the rights of African American citizens.31 One of these, the Women’s Political Council (WPC), founded by Professor Mary Fair Burks of Alabama State University, was comprised of educated Black women: Alabama State faculty members, nurses, public schoolteachers, social workers, and other professionals. In 1955 the WPC responded to over 30 complaints about indignities faced by Black riders on city buses, including the case of 15-year-old Claudette Colvin. On March 2, nearly 8 months before Rosa Parks came to public attention, Claudette, an “A” student at Booker T. Washington High School, refused to give up her seat to a White rider and was forcibly removed from the bus. In doing so, Claudette Colvin followed in the wake of Black women—Geneva Johnson, Viola White, Katie Wingfield, Espie Worthy—similarly ill-treated, sometimes beaten, for standing up to the power of Montgomery City Lines.

正如罗莎·帕克斯 (Rosa Parks) 并不是第一个拒绝让白人骑手获得席位的人一样,1955 年 12 月 1 日自发产生的抵制想法也不是第一个。多年来,关于抵制的讨论一直在空中飘扬。1954 年 5 月,WPC 主席兼阿拉巴马州立大学英语教授乔·安·吉布森·罗宾逊 (Jo Ann Gibson Robinson) 致信蒙哥马利市长,威胁如果情况没有改善,将进行抵制。“即使是现在,”罗宾逊写道,“我们仍在计划减少或根本不乘坐我们的公交车”(来源 7.5)。罗宾逊在罗莎·帕克斯被捕前 18 个多月写了这封信。

Just as Rosa Parks was not the first to deny her seat to a White rider, neither was the idea for a boycott spontaneously hatched on December 1, 1955. Discussions of a boycott had been floating in the air for years. In May 1954, Jo Ann Gibson Robinson, WPC president and professor of English at Alabama State University, sent a letter to Montgomery’s mayor threatening a boycott if conditions did not improve. “Even now,” Robinson wrote, “plans are being made to ride less, or not at all, on our buses” (Source 7.5). Robinson wrote her letter more than 18 months before Rosa Parks was arrested.

帕克斯夫人于 12 月 1 日被捕的消息迅速传遍了蒙哥马利的黑人社区。那天晚上,乔·安·罗宾逊(Jo Ann Robinson)听说此事后,给蒙哥马利的两名黑人律师之一弗雷德·D·格雷(Fred D. Gray)打电话。当她建议发起抵制的时机已经成熟时,格雷问道:“你准备好了吗?” 罗宾逊的举动表明她已经做好了准备。那天半夜到第二天凌晨,她打印了一份宣布这一行动的传单。在阿拉巴马州油印机的帮助下,她用了 35 令纸复印了 17,500 份副本,将其切成三份后,制作了 52,500 张传单:足够了,然后为蒙哥马利黑人社区的每个成员提供了一些。第二天早上四点到七点之间,罗宾逊和她的同事绘制了分发路线。到了下午三点左右,蒙哥马利因计划抵制的消息而热闹非凡。传单被分发给蒙哥马利的黑人教堂,以便在周日早上的礼拜期间宣布这一行动。罗宾逊和 WPC 的其他成员整个周末都在绘制周一接车的集合点、组织电话银行、向黑人出租车司机提供费率补贴,以及组织 200 辆汽车和卡车作为替代交通工具。

News of Mrs. Parks’s arrest on December 1 spread quickly throughout Montgomery’s Black community. Hearing about it that evening, Jo Ann Robinson called Fred D. Gray, one of two Black lawyers in Montgomery. When she suggested that the time was ripe to initiate a boycott, Gray asked, “Are you ready?” Robinson’s actions communicated just how ready she was. By the middle of that night and into the early hours of the next morning, she typed up a leaflet announcing the action. With the help of Alabama State’s mimeograph machine, she used 35 reams of paper to run off 17,500 duplicates, which, when cut into thirds, produced 52,500 leaflets: enough and then some for every member of Montgomery’s Black community. Between four and seven o’clock the next morning, Robinson and her colleagues mapped distribution routes. By midafternoon, Montgomery was abuzz with news of the planned boycott. Leaflets were distributed to Montgomery’s Black churches so that the action could be announced during Sunday morning services. Robinson and other members of the WPC spent the weekend charting assembly points for Monday pickups, organizing phone banks, subsidizing rates with Black taxi drivers, and organizing 200 cars and trucks for use as alternative transport.

尽管遭到强烈反对,抵制活动仍持续了一年多。WPC 和蒙哥马利进步协会 (MIA) 的成员不知疲倦地努力维持抵制活动,蒙哥马利进步协会是一个由黑人领袖组成的组织,旨在协调这一努力。1956 年 6 月 4 日,美国地方法院对布劳德诉盖尔案作出裁决,这是另一起质疑吉姆·克劳法合宪性的案件。11 月 13 日,最高法院维持了布劳德诉盖尔案,实际上宣布地方和州的公交车隔离法违宪。32随着 1956 年 12 月 20 日的裁决,为期 381 天的抵制公交车活动戛然而止。

Despite intense opposition, the boycott continued for over a year. Members of the WPC and the Montgomery Improvement Association (MIA), an organization of Black leaders formed to coordinate the effort, worked tirelessly to keep the boycott afloat. On June 4, 1956, the U.S. District Court ruled on Browder v. Gayle, another case challenging the constitutionality of Jim Crow. On November 13, the Supreme Court upheld Browder v. Gayle, effectively declaring that local and state bus segregation laws were unconstitutional.32 With that ruling on December 20, 1956, the 381-day bus boycott came to a halt.

蒙哥马利巴士抵制运动是一个社区组织和面对经常暴力反对的大规模抗议的故事。从一开始,乔·安·罗宾逊和 WPC 其他成员的努力就为抵制活动赢得了广泛的支持。1955 年 12 月 5 日星期一晚上,领导人召开群众会议,制定进一步的抗议计划。当地一份报纸估计,蒙哥马利有 7000 多名黑人公民参加了这次会议。33

The Montgomery Bus Boycott is a story of community organization and mass protest in the face of often violent opposition. From the very beginning, the efforts of Jo Ann Robinson and other members of the WPC helped to create widespread support for the boycott. On the evening of Monday, December 5, 1955, leaders held a mass meeting to make further plans for protest. One local newspaper estimated that over 7,000 Black citizens of Montgomery participated in the meeting.33

虽然罗莎·帕克斯当然出席了,但这次会议不仅仅是关于她被捕的问题。相反,罗莎·帕克斯成为了长期在表面之下酝酿的不满和镇压的象征。MIA 领导人之一拉尔夫·阿伯内西牧师谈到罗莎·帕克斯在抵制活动中的作用以及她出席会议的重要性时指出,罗莎·帕克斯出席了会议向人群展示,因为“我们希望她成为我们抗议运动的象征” 34来源 7.6)。她不仅是抗议的象征,而且是一个经过战略选择的象征。德克斯特街教堂 (Dexter Street Church) 28 岁的魅力超凡的牧师马丁·路德·金 (Martin Luther King, Jr.) 博士将帕克斯夫人描述为“蒙哥马利最优秀的公民之一——不是最优秀的黑人公民之一,而是最优秀的公民之一”蒙哥马利。” 35

While Rosa Parks was certainly present, the meeting was not simply about her arrest. Rather, Rosa Parks became a symbol of the discontent and repression that had long been simmering beneath the surface. Regarding her role in the boycott and the importance of her presence at the meeting, Reverend Ralph Abernathy, one of the leaders of the MIA, noted that Rosa Parks was presented to the crowd because “we wanted her to become symbolic of our protest movement”34 (Source 7.6). Not only was she a symbol of the protest, she was a strategically selected symbol. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., the charismatic 28-year-old pastor of Dexter Street Church, described Mrs. Parks as “one of the finest citizens of Montgomery—not one of the finest Negro citizens, but one of the finest citizens of Montgomery.”35

运动需要象征,而罗莎·帕克斯非常适合成为抗议蒙哥马利公交车上种族隔离的象征。抗议活动的领导人承认了这一点。但蒙哥马利巴士抵制事件比一个拒绝被赶下台的孤独女性的故事更复杂。这是一个社区在数十个组织的帮助下动员起来的故事;每个人都有自己的议程和理念,但抛开分歧,作为一个统一的力量行事。历史告诉我们,无论是 1955 年的蒙哥马利、1980 年的格但斯克造船厂还是 1989 年的柏林,没有什么比多样化的人类集体以单一力量的形式出现更强大的了。

Movements need symbols, and Rosa Parks was ideally suited to become a symbol of protest against segregation on Montgomery buses. The leaders of the protest acknowledged this. But the Montgomery Bus Boycott is a more complex story than that of a lone woman who refused to be unseated. It is the story of a community that mobilized with the help of dozens of organizations; each had its own agenda and philosophy, but put aside their differences and acted as a unified force. As history shows us, whether it’s Montgomery in 1955, the Gdansk shipyards in 1980, or Berlin in 1989, nothing is more powerful than the variegated human collective emerging as a single force.

与此同时,“群众运动”是一个抽象概念,而抽象概念是出了名的难以叙述。人类对具体性的渴望使我们从人群中拉出个人,有时让这些人物掩盖了不太生动但同样重要的故事。人类的头脑很容易想象一个有尊严的女人,尽管受到不公正制度的威胁,但坚定地拒绝让座。不太容易想象,当然也不那么引人注目的是,一群群的公民一周又一周在教堂的地下室聚集在一起,一边喝着陈旧的咖啡,一边制定策略,归档会议记录,并安排进一步的会议。

At the same time, a “mass movement” is an abstraction, and abstractions are notoriously difficult to narrate. The human desire for concreteness makes us pull individuals from the crowd, and sometimes allows these figures to overshadow less vivid, but equally important stories. The human mind can easily visualize a dignified woman steadfastly refusing to give up her seat despite threats by the agents of an unjust system. What is less easy to visualize, and certainly less compelling to narrate, is groups of citizens coming together week after week in church basements, plotting strategy over stale coffee, filing minutes, and scheduling further meetings.

我们忘记了英雄的加冕有时是任意的。毫无疑问,罗莎·帕克斯是一位具有令人难以置信的勇气和道德力量的女性。但乔·安·罗宾逊也是如此,她敏锐的政治技巧和社区组织能力是抵制成功的关键。您的学生会知道帕克斯夫人的故事,但他们中不太可能有人听说过乔·安·罗宾逊。然而,乔·安·罗宾逊和罗莎·帕克斯一样都是英雄。我们神圣化帕克斯而忽视罗宾逊,这一事实告诉我们历史记忆的变化无常,并提出了我们认为过去重要的事情的问题。

We forget that the crowning of heroes is sometimes arbitrary. No doubt Rosa Parks was a woman of incredible courage and moral strength. But the same could be said for Jo Ann Robinson, whose keen political skill and powers of community organization were a linchpin of the boycott’s success. Your students will know the story of Mrs. Parks, but it is unlikely that any one of them ever heard of Jo Ann Robinson. Yet Jo Ann Robinson was no less a hero than Rosa Parks. The fact that we sanctify Parks and ignore Robinson teaches us about the fickle nature of historical memory, and raises questions about what we consider significant from the past.

学生面临的挑战

Challenges for Students

当我们试图扩大这样一种观点,即随着罗莎·帕克斯的被捕,“整个摇摇欲坠的吉姆·克劳大厦开始摇摇欲坠”,或者这一行为“悄然引发了一场社会革命”时,会发生什么?36在我们对高中班级的研究中,我们发现罗莎·帕克斯的故事是如此根深蒂固,以至于即使在面对扩展它的证据之后,许多学生仍然坚持传统的故事。考虑一下 11 年级学生 Ryan 在回答提示时摘录的内容:为什么抵制蒙哥马利公交车会成功?在写论文之前,这位学生和他的同学检查了各种主要来源,包括乔·安·罗宾逊的信和拉尔夫·阿伯内西的声明。该学生没有根据新信息改变他的理解,而是挤压新信息以适应他先前存在的想法(见图7.1)。

What happens when we try to expand the view that the “whole shaky edifice of Jim Crow began to totter” with Rosa Parks’s arrest, or that this one act “quietly set off a social revolution”?36 In our work with high school classes, we have found that the story of Rosa Parks is so deeply ingrained that even after being confronted with evidence that expands it, many students hold tight to the traditional story. Consider the following excerpt by Ryan, an 11th-grader responding to the prompt: Why did the boycott of Montgomery’s buses succeed? Before writing his essay, this student and his classmates examined a variety of primary sources, including Jo Ann Robinson’s letter and Ralph Abernathy’s statement. Rather than changing his understanding in light of new information, this student squeezes the new information to fit his preexisting ideas (see Figure 7.1).

瑞安重现了人们熟悉的罗莎·帕克斯的浪漫化描述,称她“古雅”,这个形容词在他审阅的文件中从未出现过。他将帕克斯被捕与抵制公交车之间的关系视为因果关系之一。当他从文件中提取信息时,他并没有破坏他所知道的故事,而是将其(错误地)添加到其中。瑞安引用乔·安·罗宾逊信中的内容违反了时间顺序的基本规则;他用这封信来支持帕克斯被捕黑人公民之间“团结”的说法,尽管这封信实际上是在事件发生前18 个月写的。

Ryan reproduces the familiar romanticized account of Rosa Parks, describing her as “quaint,” an adjective that appears nowhere in the documents he reviewed. He casts the relationship between Parks’s arrest and the bus boycott as one of cause and effect. When he draws on information from the documents, rather than disrupting the story he knows, it is (incorrectly) added to it. Ryan’s quotation from Jo Ann Robinson’s letter violates the basic rule of chronology; he uses it to support the claim that Black citizens “bonded” with one another after Parks’s arrest, even though the letter was actually written 18 months before the incident took place.

同班学生肖娜的反应则不同。对她来说,文件证据的遭遇改变了蒙哥马利事件的全貌(见图7.2)。

Shawna, a student in the same class, responded differently. For her, the encounter with documentary evidence changed the entire picture of what happened in Montgomery (see Figure 7.2).

肖娜将罗莎·帕克斯的被捕置于蒙哥马利黑人社区为结束种族歧视的侮辱性做法而持续努力的背景下。虽然帕克斯的被捕是有其应有的(肖娜将其描述为“最严重的事件”),但它被置于一系列事件中,是帕克斯被捕之前开始并持续很长一段时间的长期斗争的一部分。

Shawna places Rosa Parks’s arrest in the context of an ongoing effort by Montgomery’s Black community to put an end to the demeaning practices of Jim Crow. While Parks’s arrest is given its due (Shawna describes it as “the crowning incident”), it is placed in a chain of events, part of a longer struggle that began before Parks’s arrest and continued well after.

这两个学生,既是优秀的读者,又是优秀的作家,同班同学,接触的材料相同,怎么会产生如此不同的叙述呢?瑞安正面回答了论文问题,甚至将原始材料整合到了他的期末论文中。但瑞安并没有利用这些资料来重塑他的理解,而是陷入了一个让许多人陷入困境的陷阱:瑞安没有仔细阅读这些文件,而是突袭了他们寻找引文来支持已经形成的假设。另一方面,肖娜允许与原始材料的接触,以恢复对公交车抵制和帕克斯在其中所扮演角色的先入为主的观念。通过关注乔·安·罗宾逊文件的日期并将事件按时间顺序排列,肖娜意识到帕克斯的行为有重要的前身,而从 1955 年 12 月 1 日星期一开始的事情已经渗透了数月,甚至数年。

How is it that these two students, both good readers and writers, members of the same class and exposed to the same materials, could produce such divergent accounts? Ryan addressed the essay question head-on, and even integrated source material into his final essay. But instead of using these sources to refashion his understanding, Ryan fell into a trap that snares many: Rather than reading the documents carefully, Ryan raided them in search of quotations to prop up an already formed hypothesis. Shawna, on the other hand, allowed an encounter with source material to rehabilitate a preconceived notion of the bus boycott and Parks’s role in it. By attending to the date of the Jo Ann Robinson document and placing events in temporal sequence, Shawna realized that Parks’s actions had important predecessors, and that what began on Monday, December 1, 1955, had been percolating for months, if not years.

这两篇文章并没有什么不同寻常的地方。任何有课堂经验的人都会看到一些学生的新理解的灯泡熄灭了,而另一些学生则顽强地坚持先前的信念,即使面对相反的证据。同时,这些文章提醒我们一个重要原则:虽然来源可以通过恢复原始演员的声音来活跃教学,他们没有提供成功的神奇公式。遇到直接挑战学生信念的主要证据可能仍然会让一些人不受影响。正如我们有时会在面对新数据时重塑我们的信念一样,我们也会通过扭曲新数据以适应先入为主的模式来改变新数据。有时我们干脆完全忽略新证据。无论哪种情况,结果都是一样的:我们紧紧抓住我们先前的信念。

These two essays are in no way unusual. Anyone with classroom experience has seen the light bulb of new understanding go off for some students, while others hold tenaciously to prior beliefs, even when faced with evidence to the contrary. At the same time, these essays remind us of an important principle: While sources can enliven instruction by restoring the voices of original actors, they provide no magic formula for success. An encounter with primary evidence that directly challenges students’ beliefs may still leave some unaffected. Just as we sometimes refashion our beliefs in the face of new data, we also alter new data by twisting it to fit preconceived patterns. Sometimes we simply ignore new evidence altogether. In either case, the result is the same: We grasp tightly to our prior beliefs.

 

 

图 7.1。瑞安的论文

Figure 7.1. Ryan’s Essay


图像

 

 

1955 年冬日的一个冬日,一位古雅的非裔美国妇女坐在蒙哥马利的一辆公共汽车上。当她拒绝将座位让给一位白人公民时,罗莎·帕克斯在不知不觉中发起了历史上规模最大、持续时间最长的公开抵制活动之一。帕克斯女士因不让座而被监禁。这引起了非裔美国人社区范围内的愤怒。被压迫人民提出的解决方案是公开抵制所有蒙哥马利城市公交车,直到改变现行法律以适应任何一个种族的人民。

A quaint African-American woman seated herself on a Montgomery public bus one winter day in 1955. When she refused to abdicate her seat to a white citizen, Rosa Parks unknowingly initiated one of history’s largest and longest public boycotts. Ms. Parks was incarcerated for not subjecting her seat. This created community-wide rage through the African-Americans. The solution the oppressed people developed was public boycott of all Montgomery city buses until the abiding laws were changed to suit people of either race.

这次袭击需要大量的战略以及整个非洲裔美国人的协调。协调抵制活动本身就是一项任务。制定了不同的方法供人们用来上班、上学或其他郊游。全体人民与邻居团结起来,寻找解决当前问题的方法。“越来越多的人与邻居和朋友一起乘车,以免受到公交车司机的侮辱和羞辱。” (罗宾逊给市长的信)。37

This strike took much strategy, and coordination throughout the African-American populace. Coordinating the boycott presented a task within itself. Different methods were mapped out for people to use to attend work, school or other outings. The whole of the population bonded with their neighbors to find a way to rise above the issue at hand. “More and more of our people are arranging with neighbors and friends to ride to keep from being insulted and humiliated by bus drivers.” (Letter from Robinson to Mayor).37

 

 

图 7.2。肖娜的散文

Figure 7.2. Shawna’s Essay


图像

 

 

人们经常听说,罗莎·帕克斯拒绝给白人让座的事件引发了蒙哥马利巴士抵制运动。然而,这种情况并非如此。尽管罗莎·帕克斯的被捕是民权史上最重大的事件,也可能是抵制活动开始的原因,但抵制公交车的计划早在几个月前就已被讨论过。这次活动是一次组织严密、决心坚定、计划周密的活动。

It is very common to hear that the incident, where Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat to a white man, is what started the Montgomery Bus Boycott. However, this is not the case. Though Rosa Parks’ arrest was the crowning incident in the history of civil rights and may have been what got the boycott started, the plans for a bus boycott had been talked about months earlier. This event was a highly organized and determined effort and planned through very carefully.

抵制活动前一年,蒙哥马利市议会提议讨论修改公交车法。这些提议得到了解决,但仅对部分法律进行了轻微修改。“与以前相比,公交车开始在更多黑人居住的角落停靠。然而,在座位和登机方面,同样的做法仍在继续。” (妇女政治委员会主席乔·安·罗宾逊的来信)。

A year before the boycott, discussions of changing the bus laws were proposed to the Montgomery City Council. These propositions were addressed, but only some of the laws were slightly changed. “Busses have begun stopping on more corners where negroes live than previously. However, the same practices in seating and boarding continue.” (letter from Jo Ann Robinson, President of the Women’s Political Council).

蒙哥马利巴士抵制事件已成为集体记忆中罗莎·帕克斯被捕的代名词。邮票、公共汽车上的海报、儿童传记和纪念黑人历史月的小学集会都强化了这一观念。新学习面临的最大挑战之一是相信我们没什么可学的。只有当我们关注细节、当我们停顿足够长的时间以按时间顺序排列信息、当我们允许新数据告知和挑战我们的理解时,历史才会带来开放的思想。蒙哥马利巴士抵制事件的故事提供了一个测试案例,帮助学生认识到他们对这一事件的“了解”在很多方面都比他们最初想象的要少。

The story of the Montgomery Bus Boycott has become synonymous in collective memory with Rosa Parks’s arrest. This notion is reinforced by postage stamps, posters on buses, children’s biographies, and elementary school assemblies commemorating Black History Month. One of the biggest challenges to new learning is the belief that we have little to learn. History leads to open-mindedness only when we pay attention to detail, when we pause long enough to place information in temporal sequence, when we allow new data to inform and challenge our understanding. The story of the Montgomery Bus Boycott provides a test case for helping students realize that what they “know” about this event is, in many respects, less than what they originally thought.

为什么要讲罗莎·帕克斯和蒙哥马利巴士抵制运动?

Why Teach About Rosa Parks and the Montgomery Bus Boycott?

一个熟悉的故事,却有着不熟悉的曲折。与课程中的新主题不同,罗莎·帕克斯的故事是学生从小学起就听到的故事。有些人会把生动的故事带到课堂上,确信他们所知道的一切都是真的,而另一些人则会摸不着头脑,想知道为什么他们要无数次地研究这个故事。正是这种非常熟悉的感觉为我们如何确定充满神话的过去的真相提供了切入点。关于蒙哥马利巴士抵制运动,我们可以提出许多问题,其中一个是“罗莎·帕克斯坐在哪里?” 是最具体的。这是一个简单的事实问题,没有任何可能让学生犯错的含义、多重因果关系和推理的细微差别。

A Familiar Story with Unfamiliar Twists. Unlike new topics in the curriculum, the story of Rosa Parks is one that students have heard since elementary school. Some will bring vivid narratives to class, certain that everything they know is true, while others will scratch their heads, wondering why they are studying the story for the umpteenth time. It is this very familiarity that provides entry into the question of how we determine truth about a myth-strewn past. Of the many questions we can ask about the Montgomery Bus Boycott, “Where did Rosa Parks sit?” is the most concrete. It is a straightforward factual question without any of the nuances of meaning, multiple causality, and inference that can trip students up.

确定一个事件的基本事实不仅是历史理解的核心,也是我们整个法律体系的核心:每天都有数以千计的命运取决于案件的基本事实的确定。事实侦探工作很复杂,尤其是当百科全书和教科书等可信来源相互矛盾时。警方的报告本应揭示罗莎·帕克斯的坐姿,但却提出了进一步的挑战。事实证明,不是一份报告,而是两份报告,问题仍然是军官日和米克森是否在某个特定方向上歪曲了他们的记录。帕克斯夫人也没有解决这个问题,因为她在人生的不同时期记得不同的事情。

Determining the basic facts of an event is central not only to historical understanding but our entire legal system: Every day thousands of fates rest on determining the basic facts of a case. Factual detective work is complicated, especially when trusted sources such as encyclopedias and textbooks contradict one another. The police report, which should have shed light on where Rosa Parks sat, offered further challenges; it turns out there was not one report, but two, and the question remains whether Officers Day and Mixon skewed their records in a particular direction. Nor does Mrs. Parks resolve the problem, as she remembered different things at different times in her life.

这个看似简单的问题——“罗莎·帕克斯坐在哪里?”——为学生提供了一个认真思考不同来源和不同类型证据的机会:自传叙述;教科书叙述;主要文件;最终,解决问题的来源是双方在联合事实陈述中签署的法庭文件。

This deceptively simple question—“Where did Rosa Parks sit?”—offers students an opportunity to think hard about different sources and different kinds of evidence: autobiographical accounts; textbook narratives; primary documents; and ultimately, the source that puts the question to rest, a court document signed by both parties in a joint statement of facts.

历史记住和忘记了谁?历史选择记住谁、忘记谁的问题不能用一份文件来回答。相反,它迫使我们审视如何从过去的角色中挑选人物,将一些人提升为英雄,同时让另一些人陷入默默无闻。拒绝让出席位本质上比参与政治组织并选择合适的时机通过撰写传单并将其分发给社区的 42,000 名成员来采取行动更重要吗?为什么一种行动被认为是英雄行为,值得在邮票上纪念,而另一种则不然?罗莎·帕克斯和乔·安·吉布森·罗宾逊是同时代人,两人都致力于社会变革。通过同时考虑它们,学生有机会研究历史理解的核心问题之一:是什么使一个人、一种行为、

Whom Does History Remember and Forget? The question of who history chooses to remember and forget cannot be answered by a single document. Instead, it forces us to examine how we pluck figures from the past’s cast of characters, elevating some as heroes while sentencing others to obscurity. Is refusing to give up a seat inherently more significant than engaging in political organizing and choosing the right moment to spring into action by composing a leaflet and distributing it to 42,000 members of a community? Why is one action considered heroic and worthy of commemoration on postage stamps and the other not? Rosa Parks and Jo Ann Gibson Robinson were contemporaries, and both worked for social change. By considering them in tandem, students have the chance to examine one of the core issues of historical understanding: What makes a person, an act, or an event worthy of being remembered?

关于社会运动的教学。对于学生来说,将蒙哥马利巴士抵制运动的成功归因于少数人的英雄行为,比理解整个社区如何抛开分歧、团结一致要容易得多。抵制公交车之所以成功,是因为普通公民做出了无数普通的行为。他们提前 45 分钟离开家。他们组织了电话树,以确保每个人都知道在哪里可以搭乘临时出租车。他们集中财力在紧急情况下提供交通。每当替代交通系统出现故障时,他们都会遭受等待乘车的不便。这些小事日复一日,月复一月,持续了 381 天,直到蒙哥马利市防线的后方几乎被打破。了解大规模集体行动可以打开了解吉姆·克劳的消亡之门。通过了解社会行动的动态,学生将能够讨论美国历史上的其他群众运动——废奴、妇女选举权、工会组织和 20 世纪 60 年代的反战抗议。

Teaching About Social Movements. It is much easier for students to pin the success of the Montgomery Bus Boycott on the heroic actions of a few individuals than to understand how entire communities could put aside differences and come together in unison. The bus boycott succeeded because ordinary citizens committed innumerable ordinary acts. They left the house 45 minutes earlier. They organized phone trees to make sure that everyone knew where to catch one of the ad hoc taxis. They pooled their financial resources to provide transportation in case of emergencies. They suffered the inconvenience of waiting for rides whenever the alternative transport system broke down. These small acts were committed day after day, month after month, for 381 days, until the back of the Montgomery City Lines was nearly broken. Understanding mass collective action unlocks the door to understanding Jim Crow’s demise. By understanding the dynamics of social action, students will be able to address other mass movements in American history—abolition, women’s suffrage, unionization, and the antiwar protests of the 1960s.

您将如何使用这些材料?

How Might You Use These Materials?

场景 1(1 小时课程)。罗莎·帕克斯坐在哪里?这个场景围绕一个具体问题,让学生扮演历史侦探的角色。

Scenario 1 (1 Hour Lesson). Where did Rosa Parks sit? This scenario revolves around a concrete question and puts students in the role of historical detective.


CCSS

9–10 #1

11–12 #8

CCSS

9–10 #1

11–12 #8


首先要求学生重述罗莎·帕克斯的故事,然后要求他们在空白巴士图(工具 7.1,第一部分)的 36 个座位中标记帕克斯夫人所坐的位置。你会得到各种各样的答案。询问学生他们如何确定哪些答案是正确的。然后,将学生分组,让他们考虑源 7.1源 7.2以及工具 7.1第二部分中的图形组织者。让他们在分析文档时填写图形组织器,然后返回空白总线图。让他们以小组的形式决定将帕克斯夫人放在公交车图上的什么位置。让每个小组进行口头辩论来证明他们的选择是正确的。

Begin by asking students to retell the story of Rosa Parks, and then ask them to mark where among the 36 seats on the blank bus diagram (Tool 7.1, Part One) Mrs. Parks sat. You will get a variety of answers. Ask students how they determined which of these answers was true. Then, arrange students in groups and have them consider Source 7.1 and Source 7.2 along with the graphic organizer in Tool 7.1, Part Two. Have them fill out the graphic organizer as they analyze documents and then return to the blank bus diagram. Ask them to decide as a group where to place Mrs. Parks on the bus diagram. Allow each group to make an oral argument justifying their choice.

图像

除了警方报告外,学生还可以查阅教科书、百科全书和自传的本章摘录。注意学生如何权衡这些不同的资源并判断它们的可信度。教科书从哪里获取信息,我们如何知道?(向学生展示带有脚注的历史专着或文章,并让他们将其与教科书进行比较;指出专业历史写作与教科书写作不同,通过在脚注中列出其来源来留下痕迹。)

In addition to the police reports, students may consult their textbook, encyclopedia, and autobiography excerpts from this chapter. Be attentive to how students weigh these different resources and judge their trustworthiness. Where do textbooks get their information, and how would we know? (Show students a historical monograph or article with footnotes, and have them compare it to the textbook; point out that professional historical writing, unlike textbook writing, leaves tracks by listing its sources in footnotes.)

考虑一下为什么会存在这种差异。鉴于这些来源,有没有办法确定帕克斯夫人坐在哪里?许多学生会说不,这个答案提出了我们如何才能确定地知道任何事情的问题。如果我们甚至无法确定一个人坐在哪里的基本事实(她因这一行为而被捕,并已向阿拉巴马州上诉法院提起诉讼),那么我们如何才能确定任何问题的事实

Consider why such differences might exist. Given these sources, is there a way to know for sure where Mrs. Parks sat? Many students will say no, an answer that raises the question of how we can know anything for sure. If we can’t even establish basic facts about where a person has sat (an act for which she was arrested, which made its way to the Alabama Court of Appeals), how can we establish the facts of any issue?

此时,您应该让学生知道您扣留了一份重要文件:由控方和辩方签署的法庭案件图表(来源 7.3 )。虽然历史上的很多问题都无法解答,但本案的基本事实却是没有争议的。这就提出了一个明显的问题:为什么这么多二手资料来源都会出错。

At this point you should let students know that you have withheld one crucial document: the diagram from the court case (Source 7.3) signed by the prosecution and the defense. While many questions in history are unanswerable, in this case the basic facts are not in dispute. This raises the obvious question of why so many secondary sources get it wrong.


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 基于证据的思考和论证
  • Evidence-based thinking and argumentation
  • 确定来源的可靠性
  • Determining reliability of sources
  • 证实/交叉检查来源
  • Corroborating/cross-checking sources

场景 2(1 小时课程)。罗莎·帕克斯拒绝让座是否违法?本课可以与上一课一起进行,也可以独立进行。它的重点是教学生仔细阅读,并仔细研究两个文本:《蒙哥马利市法典》和《阿拉巴马州法典》。

Scenario 2 (1 Hour Lesson). Did Rosa Parks break the law when she refused to give up her seat? This lesson can accompany the previous one or stand on its own. It pivots on teaching students to read closely, and carefully examines two texts: the Montgomery City Code and the Alabama State Code.


CCSS #2、#4

CCSS #2, #4


这里的问题很复杂,许多学生会受到法律法规的技术细节的挑战。此外,他们也不熟悉吉姆·克劳的特点——司机后面的 10 个“神圣座位”永远不会被黑人占据,即使过道挤满了人,看不到一个白人。一旦你了解了吉姆·克劳时代乘坐公共汽车的轮廓,放慢阅读过程并帮助学生完成这两篇困难的文本(工具 7.2)。

The issues here are complex, and many students will be challenged by the technicalities of the legal code. Moreover, they will be unfamiliar with the peculiarities of Jim Crow—the notion of the 10 “sacred seats” behind the driver that could never be occupied by Blacks even when aisles were packed and not a single White was in sight. Once you’ve established the contours of riding the bus during the Jim Crow era, slow down the reading process and help students wend their way through these two difficult texts (Tool 7.2).


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 分析法律法规
  • Analyzing legal codes
  • 细读
  • Close reading

场景 3(1.5-3 小时课程)。是什么导致了蒙哥马利巴士抵制运动的成功?这一场景提出了蒙哥马利巴士抵制运动作为一个整体的更大问题,并挑战学生们超越单一女性的行动如何能够推翻整个种族隔离大厦。

Scenario 3 (1.5–3 Hour Lesson). What led to the success of the Montgomery Bus Boycott? This scenario gets at the larger question of the Montgomery Bus Boycott as a whole and challenges students to go beyond how a single woman’s action could topple the whole edifice of Jim Crow.


CCSS

6–8 #10

9–10 #1

11–12 #9

CCSS

6–8 #10

9–10 #1

11–12 #9


您可以从学生有关故事的背景知识开始。让他们接触教育家赫伯特·科尔(Herbert Kohl)版本的儿童读物中讲述故事的刻板方式,并询问是否有人会修改它(来源7.4)。让学生以小组形式创建一个时间表,其中包括抵制活动、乔·安·罗宾逊 (Jo Ann Robinson) 给盖尔市长的信以及拉尔夫·阿伯内西 (Ralph Abernathy) 的声明(工具 7.3来源 7.57.6)。让他们在时间轴上绘制与抵制相关的事件。然后让他们找出是什么导致了蒙哥马利巴士抵制运动的成功;让他们选择突出每个作者立场的引文。让学生对两位高中生的论文做同样的事情;问你的学生哪一篇文章最能反映他们刚刚复习过的证据。无论哪种情况,学生都可以在讨论中或在论文或段落中分享他们的想法。

You can begin with students’ background knowledge about the story. Expose them to educator Herbert Kohl’s version of the stereotypical way the story is told in children’s books and ask if anyone would emend it (Source 7.4). In groups, have students create a timeline that includes the boycott, Jo Ann Robinson’s letter to Mayor Gayle, and Ralph Abernathy’s statement (Tool 7.3, Sources 7.5 and 7.6). On a timeline, have them plot events related to the boycott. Then ask them to identify what led to the success of the Montgomery Bus Boycott; have them select quotations that highlight each author’s positions. Have students do the same with the two high school students’ essays; ask your students which essay best reflects the evidence they have just reviewed. In either case, students could share their ideas in discussion or in an essay or paragraph.

或者,要求学生写一篇文章来回答“我们应该如何记住罗莎·帕克斯和乔·安·罗宾逊?”这个问题。学生应该解释每个人物通常如何被记住,然后他们认为应该如何记住帕克斯和罗宾逊。

Alternately, ask students to write an essay in response to the question “How should we remember Rosa Parks and Jo Ann Robinson?” Students should explain how each figure is typically remembered and then how they think Parks and Robinson should be remembered.


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 质疑叙述性叙述
  • Questioning narrative accounts
  • 神话与历史的区别
  • Distinguishing between myth and history
  • 基于证据的思考和论证
  • Evidence-based thinking and argumentation

来源和工具

Sources and Tools

资料来源7.1警方报告打字)

SOURCE 7.1: POLICE REPORT (TYPED)


图像


资料来源:1955 年 12 月 1 日逮捕罗莎·帕克斯的警官 Day 和 Mixon 提交的打字警方报告(原件可在http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/rosa-parks/#document找到)。

Source: Typed police report submitted by Officers Day and Mixon, who arrested Rosa Parks, on December 1, 1955 (original can be found at http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/rosa-parks/#document).

资料来源7.2 警方报告手写)

SOURCE 7.2: POLICE REPORT (HANDWRITTEN)


图像


资料来源:Officers Day 和 Mixon 提交的手写警方报告,他们于 1955 年 12 月 1 日逮捕了罗莎·帕克斯 ( http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/rosa-parks/#documents )。

Source: Handwritten police report submitted by Officers Day and Mixon, who arrested Rosa Parks on December 1, 1955 (http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/rosa-parks/#documents).

 

 

资料来源7.3:签署的总线

SOURCE 7.3: SIGNED BUS DIAGRAM


图像


资料来源:罗莎·帕克斯案中控辩双方同意的总线图,于 1956 年 2 月 22 日提交 ( http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/rosa-parks/#documents )。

Source: Bus diagram agreed to by the prosecution and defense in the case of Rosa Parks, submitted February 22, 1956 (http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/rosa-parks/#documents).

 

 

资料来源7.4 教科书版本

SOURCE 7.4: TEXTBOOK VERSION


注:作家兼教育家赫伯特·科尔调查了 20 多本历史教科书如何讲述 1955 年 12 月 1 日罗莎·帕克斯拒绝让座的故事。在此,他介绍了这些教科书所讲述的标准故事。

Note: Author and educator Herbert Kohl surveyed how more than 20 history textbooks told the story of Rosa Parks’s refusal to give up her seat on December 1, 1955. Here he presents the standard story as told by these textbooks.

“罗莎很累:蒙哥马利公交车抵制事件的故事”

“Rosa was tired: The story of the Montgomery bus boycott”

罗莎·帕克斯是一位贫穷的裁缝。20 世纪 50 年代,她住在阿拉巴马州蒙哥马利。那时,美国部分地区仍然存在种族隔离。这意味着非洲裔美国人和欧洲裔美国人不得使用相同的公共设施,例如餐馆或游泳池。这也意味着,每当城市公交车上拥挤时,非洲裔美国人就必须把前面的座位让给欧洲裔美国人,而转移到公交车的后部。

Rosa Parks was a poor seamstress. She lived in Montgomery, Alabama, during the 1950s. [In] those days there was still segregation in parts of the United States. That meant that African Americans and European Americans were not allowed to use the same public facilities such as restaurants or swimming pools. It also meant that whenever it was crowded on the city buses African Americans had to give up seats in front to European Americans and move to the back of the bus.

有一天,罗莎下班回家时感到很累,在公交车前座坐下。当公共汽车变得拥挤时,她被要求给一名欧洲裔美国人让座,但她拒绝了。公交车司机告诉她必须到公交车后面去,但她仍然不肯动。天很热,她又累又生气,变得很固执。

One day on her way home from work Rosa was tired and sat down in the front of the bus. As the bus got crowded she was asked to give up her seat to a European American man, and she refused. The bus driver told her she had to go to the back of the bus, and she still refused to move. It was a hot day, and she was tired and angry, and became very stubborn.

司机报了警,警察逮捕了罗莎。

The driver called a policeman, who arrested Rosa.

当蒙哥马利的其他非裔美国人听到这个消息时,他们也很生气。因此,他们决定拒绝乘坐公共汽车,直到允许每个人一起乘坐为止。他们抵制公共汽车。

When other African Americans in Montgomery heard this they became angry too. So they decided to refuse to ride the buses until everyone was allowed to ride together. They boycotted the buses.

由马丁·路德·金领导的抵制运动取得了成功。现在非裔美国人和欧洲裔美国人可以在蒙哥马利一起乘坐公共汽车。

The boycott, which was led by Martin Luther King, Jr., succeeded. Now African Americans and European Americans can ride the buses together in Montgomery.

罗莎·帕克斯是一个非常勇敢的人。

Rosa Parks was a very brave person.


资料来源:赫伯特·科尔,《她不会被感动》(纽约:新报社,2005 年),7-8。

Source: Herbert Kohl, She Would Not Be Moved (New York: The New Press, 2005), 7–8.

 

 

资料来源7.5:罗宾逊市长

SOURCE 7.5: ROBINSON LETTER TO THE MAYOR


注:在这封信中,乔·安·罗宾逊 (Jo Ann Robinson) 写信给蒙哥马利市市长,要求在公交车上获得公平待遇。

Note: In this letter, Jo Ann Robinson writes the mayor of Montgomery asking for fair treatment on the buses.

 

 

尊敬的西澳盖尔市长

Honorable Mayor W. A. Gayle

市政府

City Hall

蒙哥马利 (阿拉巴马州)

Montgomery, Alabama

尊敬的先生:

Dear Sir:

妇女政治委员会非常感谢您和市专员在 1954 年 3 月审查“城市公交车票价上涨案”时允许我们的代表举行听证会。理事会提出了几项要求:

The Women’s Political Council is very grateful to you and the City Commissioners for the hearing you allowed our representative during the month of March, 1954, when the “city-bus-fare-increase case” was being reviewed. There were several things the Council asked for:

  1. 一项城市法律规定,黑人可以从后向前坐,白人可以从前向后坐,直到所有座位都被占满为止。
  2. A city law that would make it possible for Negroes to sit from back toward front, and whites from front toward back until all the seats are taken.
  3. 黑人不会被要求或强迫在前面支付车费并到公共汽车后面进入。
  4. That Negroes not be asked or forced to pay fare at front and go to the rear of the bus to enter.
  5. 公共汽车停在黑人居住区的每个角落,就像白人居住的社区一样。
  6. That busses stop at every corner in residential sections occupied by Negroes as they do in communities where whites reside.

我们很高兴地报告,在黑人居住的一些地区,公交车现在开始在比以前更多的角落停靠。然而,在座位和上车方面,同样的做法仍在继续。盖尔市长,这些公共交通工具的乘客中有四分之三是黑人。如果黑人不光顾他们,他们就不可能经营。

We are happy to report that busses have begun stopping at more corners now in some sections where Negroes live than previously. However, the same practices in seating and boarding the bus continue. Mayor Gayle, three-fourths of the riders of these public conveyances are Negroes. If Negroes did not patronize them, they could not possibly operate.

越来越多的人已经与邻居和朋友安排乘车,以免受到公交车司机的侮辱和羞辱。有二十五个或更多地方组织表示计划在全市范围内抵制公交车。

More and more of our people are already arranging with neighbors and friends to ride to keep from being insulted and humiliated by bus drivers. There has been talk from twenty-five or more local organizations of planning a city-wide boycott of busses.

先生,我们认为没有必要采取强有力的措施来讨价还价,以获得适合所有公交车乘客的便利……。请考虑这一请求,如果可能的话,请采取有利行动,因为即使是现在,我们仍计划减少或根本不乘坐我们的公共汽车。我们不希望这样。

We, sir, do not feel that forceful measures are necessary in bargaining for a convenience which is right for all bus passengers…. Please consider this plea, and if possible, act favorably upon it, for even now plans are being made to ride less, or not at all, on our busses. We do not want this.

肃然,

Respectfully yours,

妇女政治委员会

The Women’s Political Council

乔·安·罗宾逊,总裁

Jo Ann Robinson, President


资料来源:摘自乔·安·罗宾逊 (Jo Ann Robinson) 于 1954 年 5 月 21 日在阿拉巴马州蒙哥马利所写的一封信。转载于乔·安·吉布森·罗宾逊,《蒙哥马利巴士抵制运动和发起它的女性》,编辑。David J. Garrow(诺克斯维尔:田纳西大学出版社,1987 年)。

Source: Excerpt from a letter written by Jo Ann Robinson, May 21, 1954, Montgomery, Alabama. Reprinted in Jo Ann Gibson Robinson, The Montgomery Bus Boycott and the Women Who Started It, ed. David J. Garrow (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1987).

 

 

资料来源7.6 伯纳西记得

SOURCE 7.6: ABERNATHY REMEMBERS


注:在下面的摘录中,拉尔夫·阿伯内西牧师回忆了抵制第一天蒙哥马利进步协会 (MIA) 在当地浸信会教堂举行的第一次群众大会。此后,MIA 每周定期举行会议,直至抵制活动结束。

Note: In the following excerpt, Reverend Ralph Abernathy remembers the first mass meeting of the Montgomery Improvement Association (MIA) at a local Baptist church on the first day of the boycott. After this, the MIA held regular weekly meetings until the boycott ended.

我和 ML King 一起去参加了会议。天下着毛毛细雨。我一直在制定决议直到最后一刻。我收到指示:一是取消抗议,二是如果有指示,继续抗议,直到申诉得到批准。我们进行了一次成功的“一日抗议”,但我们担心,如果我们将其延长到第一天之后,我们可能会失败;毕竟,取消抗议可能会更好,然后我们可以将这种“一日抵制”作为对未来谈判的威胁。不过,我们要根据人群的多少来决定是否继续抗议……。

We, M. L. King and I, went to the meeting together. It was drizzling; I had been working up until the last minute on the resolutions. I was given instructions: one, to call off the protest, or two, if indicated, to continue the protest until the grievances were granted. We had had a successful “one-day protest,” but we feared that if we extended it beyond the first day, we might fail; it might be better after all to call the protest off, and then we could hold this “one-day boycott” as a threat for future negotiations. However, we were to determine whether to continue the protest by the size of the crowds….

当我们距离教堂大约二十个街区时,我们看到汽车停满了……。当我们靠近教堂时,我们看到了一大群人。《蒙哥马利广告报》估计,大约有 7,000 人试图进入一座可容纳不到 1,000 人的教堂。我们花了大约十五分钟的时间才穿过人群,恳求道:“请让我们过去——我们是金牧师和阿伯内西牧师。请允许我们通过。” ……里面的人鼓掌了至少十分钟。

When we got about twenty blocks from the church we saw cars parked solid…. As we got closer to the church we saw a great mass of people. The Montgomery Advertiser estimated the crowd at approximately 7,000 persons all trying to get in a church that will accommodate less than 1,000. It took us about fifteen minutes to work our way through the crowd by pleading: “Please let us through—we are Reverend King and Reverend Abernathy. Please permit us to get through.” … Those inside applauded for at least ten minutes.

很明显,人们和我们在一起。就在那时,所有之前拒绝参加该计划的牧师都来向金牧师和我提供服务。群众的这种团结表现显然对领导层是一种鼓舞,有助于摆脱怯懦、顺从和过度胆怯的心理。

It was apparent that the people were with us. It was then that all of the ministers who had previously refused to take part in the program came up to Reverend King and me to offer their services. This expression of togetherness on the part of the masses was obviously an inspiration to the leadership and helped to rid it of the cowardly, submissive, over timidity.

我们以歌声《前进的基督教士兵》、《迈向战争》开始了会议……。罗莎·帕克斯夫人被邀请参加群众大会,因为我们希望她成为我们抗议运动的象征。在她之后,我们介绍了丹尼尔斯先生,他很高兴为我们的会面而在那天被捕……。这些人的出现激发了热情,从而为运动注入了动力。然后我们听到了呼吁继续抵制的决议……得到了教会内外7000人的一致热情通过……。

We began the meeting by singing Onward Christian Soldiers, Marching as to War…. Mrs. Rosa Parks was presented to the mass meeting because we wanted her to become symbolic of our protest movement. Following her we presented Mr. Daniels, who happily for our meeting had been arrested on that day…. The appearance of these persons created enthusiasm, thereby giving momentum to the movement. We then heard the resolutions calling for the continuation of the boycott … unanimously and enthusiastically adopted by the 7,000 individuals both inside and outside the church….


资料来源:摘自 Ralph Abernathy 的硕士论文“社会运动的自然史”,佐治亚州亚特兰大,1958 年。

Source: Excerpt from Ralph Abernathy’s master’s thesis, “The Natural History of a Social Movement,” Atlanta, GA, 1958.

 

 

工具7.1 :ID ROSA公园位于何处_ _ _ _

TOOL 7.1: WHERE DID ROSA PARKS SIT?


第一部分:在您认为罗莎·帕克斯 1955 年 12 月 1 日被捕时所坐的座位上标记“RP”(每个盒子都是一个座位)。

PART ONE: Mark “RP” in the seat where you believe Rosa Parks sat when she was arrested on December 1, 1955 (each box is a seat).

图像

第二部分:在阅读、讨论和分析两份警方报告的同时完成此图表。

PART TWO: Complete this chart as you read, discuss, and analyze the two police reports.

图像

工具7.2 :比较蒙哥马利城市法规拉巴马法规_ _ _ _ _

TOOL 7.2: COMPARING THE MONTGOMERY CITY CODE AND THE ALABAMA STATE CODE


说明:仔细阅读每条法律并回答其后面的问题。然后考虑最后的关键问题。

Directions: Read each law carefully and answer the questions that follow it. Then consider the key question at the end.


如果任何乘客在其所属比赛的指定座位上有空座,则应任何相关负责人员的要求而拒绝坐在该座位上的行为属于违法行为。

It shall be unlawful for any passenger to refuse to take a seat among those assigned to the race to which he belongs, at the request of any such employee in charge, if there is such a seat vacant.

—《蒙哥马利市法典》,第 6 章,第 10-11 节,1952 年

—Montgomery City Code, Chapter 6, Sections 10–11, 1952


  1. “违法”是什么意思?







  2. What does “unlawful” mean?







  3. 当巴士公司工作人员询问时,乘客什么时候无权拒绝就座?



    乘客在以下情况下 不得 拒绝就座:







  4. When does a passenger NOT have the right to refuse to take a seat when asked by someone who works for the bus company?



    A passenger cannot refuse to take a seat when …







  5. 当巴士公司工作人员询问时,乘客什么时候有权拒绝就座?



    在以下情况下,乘客 可以 拒绝就座:







  6. When does a passenger have the right to refuse to take a seat when asked by someone who works for the bus company?



    A passenger can refuse to take a seat when …








负责任何车辆的汽车运输公司的售票员或代理人有权并被要求将每位乘客分配到该乘客所属比赛指定的车辆组。

The conductor or agent of the motor transportation company in charge of any vehicle is authorized and required to assign each passenger to the division of the vehicle designated for the race to which the passenger belongs.

—1940 年阿拉巴马州法典第 48 章第 301(31a, b, c) 条

—Title 48, §301(31a, b, c), Code of Alabama of 1940


  1. “授权”是什么意思?







  2. What does “authorized” mean?







  3. 乘客将被分配在哪个区域(或“分区”)的座位?







  4. In which section (or “division”) will passengers be assigned seats?







  5. 乘客与所在区域的其他乘客有什么共同点?







  6. What will passengers have in common with other passengers in their section?







图像

同意或不同意本声明:

Agree or disagree with this statement:

“罗莎·帕克斯拒绝让座就触犯了法律。”

“Rosa Parks broke the law when she refused to give up her seat.”

 

 

解释您同意或不同意的原因,并参考来源来支持您的答案。

Explain why you agree or disagree, and refer to the sources to support your answer.

 

 

工具7.3:是什么导致蒙哥马利巴士抵制运动成功 _

TOOL 7.3: WHAT LED TO THE SUCCESS OF THE MONTGOMERY BUS BOYCOTT?


  1. 将与抵制相关的文件和事件的日期添加到此时间表。



    图像



  2. Add the dates of the documents and events related to the boycott to this timeline.







  3. 当您阅读本课程的不同材料时,请完成此图表。
  4. Complete this chart as you read the different materials for this lesson.

图像

建议资源

Suggested Resources

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/aaohtml/exhibit/aointro.html

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/aaohtml/exhibit/aointro.html

美国国会图书馆举办的展览“非裔美国人的奥德赛”包括非裔美国人争取民权的不同时期的图像、文件和概述,从美国早期历史到 20 世纪的民权运动。

“African American Odyssey,” an exhibit run by the Library of Congress, includes images, documents, and overviews of different time periods in the struggle for African American civil rights, from early U.S. history through the civil rights movement of the 20th century.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/eyesontheprize/story/02_bus.html

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/eyesontheprize/story/02_bus.html

PBS 在此网站上展示了视频系列“关注奖项:美国民权运动,1954-1985”,以及广泛的一手和二手资料。该网站包括原始视频片段、照片和那个时代的其他文件。蒙哥马利巴士抵制运动是众多重点事件之一。

At this site PBS houses the video series Eyes on the Prize: America’s Civil Rights Movement, 1954–1985, along with a wide range of primary and secondary sources. The site includes original video footage, photographs, and other documents from the era. The Montgomery Bus Boycott is one of the many events highlighted.

http://montgomery.troy.edu/rosaparks/museum/

http://montgomery.troy.edu/rosaparks/museum/

罗莎帕克斯博物馆位于阿拉巴马州蒙哥马利市中心的特洛伊大学。该网站包含有关罗莎·帕克斯的生活和蒙哥马利巴士抵制运动的信息。

The Rosa Parks Museum is located at Troy University in downtown Montgomery, Alabama. This site includes information about Rosa Parks’s life and the Montgomery Bus Boycott.

http://www.sojournproject.com/

http://www.sojournproject.com/

Sojourn to the Past 是一个面向中学生和高中生的组织,带领学生实地考察美国南部民权时代的热点地区。

Sojourn to the Past is an organization for middle and high school students that leads field trips through civil rights–era hot spots in the southern United States.

http://historicalthinkingmatters.org/rosaparks/

http://historicalthinkingmatters.org/rosaparks/

该网站由斯坦福大学历史教育集团和乔治梅森大学历史与新媒体中心创建。本节重点关注蒙哥马利巴士抵制运动,包括主要文献、历史学家对文献的分析、历史学家对相关背景的解释、使用历史学家有声思考的想法、网络搜索和修改后的文献。

This site was created by Stanford University’s History Education Group and George Mason University’s Center for History and New Media. This particular section focuses on the Montgomery Bus Boycott and includes primary documents, historians’ analyses of documents, historians’ explanations of relevant background, ideas for using historians’ think-alouds, web quests, and modified documents.

 

 


第 8 章

CHAPTER 8


眨眼还是不眨眼:古巴导弹危机

To Blink or Not to Blink: The Cuban Missile Crisis

杰克·施奈德

Jack Schneider

图像

中央情报局。肯尼迪总统在椭圆形办公室会见柯蒂斯·勒梅将军和执行古巴任务的侦察飞行员。1962 年。可查阅http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/Photos_-_JFK_Library_-_Cuban_Missile_Crisis_-_p1

Central Intelligence Agency. President Kennedy meets in the Oval Office with General Curtis Lemay and reconnaissance pilots who flew the Cuban missions. 1962. Available at http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/Photos_-_JFK_Library_-_Cuban_Missile_Crisis_-_p1

约翰·F·肯尼迪总统的国务卿迪恩·腊斯克(Dean Rusk)这样描述古巴导弹危机的结果:“我们目光对视,而我认为对方只是眨了眨眼”。1962 年 10 月的两周时间里,腊斯克和肯尼迪执行委员会(或“Ex Comm”)的其他成员掌握着世界的命运。事实证明,他们的行动将阻止美国和苏联陷入世界末日般的核冲突。

“We were eyeball to eyeball, and I think the other fellow just blinked” is how Dean Rusk, President John F. Kennedy’s Secretary of State, characterized the outcome of the Cuban Missile Crisis. For 2 weeks in October 1962, Rusk and other members of JFK’s Executive Committee (or “Ex Comm”) held the fate of the world in their hands. Their actions, as it turned out, would keep the United States and Soviet Union from plunging into a nuclear conflict of apocalyptic proportions.

腊斯克的这句话很快成为冷战时期主张继续军备建设的政策制定者的旗帜。正如腊斯克和其他像他一样的人所说,“另一个家伙眨了眨眼”,只是因为美国的战术军事实力。他们警告说,如果美国无法保持对苏联的武器优势,俄罗斯人就会在我们家门口安营扎寨。这种鹰派立场以肯尼迪政府无畏边缘政策的神话故事为基础,对美国外交政策的未来产生了重大影响,其中包括昂贵的核武库的持续扩散和越南战争的升级。

Rusk’s phrase quickly became the banner for Cold War-era policymakers who advocated a continued arms buildup. The “other fellow blinked,” as Rusk and others like him argued, only because of America’s tactical military strength. Fail to maintain America’s arms advantage over the Soviet Union, they cautioned, and the Russians would be camping on our doorsteps. This hawkish stance, grounded in mythic stories about the fearless brinkmanship of the Kennedy Administration, had major consequences for the future of U.S. foreign policy—consequences that included the continued proliferation of exorbitantly expensive nuclear stockpiles and the escalation of the Vietnam War.

毫不奇怪,这个版本的古巴导弹危机也成为美国公众的传奇。通过媒体报道、流行历史,当然还有美国历史教科书,它讲述了执行委员会成员之间达成的共识,赞成“通过其他军事措施封锁古巴,包括可能的空袭甚至入侵” ,如果导弹没有被移除,则继续。” 1从古巴撤出导弹后不久出现的教科书记载同样描绘了美国采取的强硬立场。《美国故事》的作者“赫鲁晓夫”写道,“赌的是能够在美国家门口秘密建立强大的进攻基地来对抗美国”——此举将使他“在冷战中取得重大胜利”。

Not surprisingly, this version of the Cuban Missile Crisis also became legend among the American public. Conveyed through accounts in the press, popular histories, and of course American history textbooks, it told of a consensus that emerged among the members of Ex Comm favoring “a blockade of Cuba with other military measures, including possibly an air strike and even an invasion, to follow if the missiles were not removed.”1 Textbook accounts appearing shortly after the withdrawal of missiles from Cuba similarly portrayed a hard-line stance taken by the United States. “Khrushchev,” the authors of Story of America wrote, “had gambled on being able to face the U.S. with a secretly built powerful offensive base on its doorstep”—a move that would have given him “a major victory in the cold war.”

然而,很快人们就发现,他不愿意冒与美国发生实际战争的风险。面对肯尼迪总统的强力反制、美洲国家组织对美国的坚定支持以及联合国秘书长吴丹的巧妙斡旋,他同意拆除进攻性武器。于是危机过去了。2

It soon became evident, however, that he was not willing to risk actual war with the United States. Faced with President Kennedy’s vigorous counter-measures, solid Organization of American States backing for the United States, and the skillful mediation of Secretary General U Thant of the United Nations, he agreed to remove the offensive weapons. So the crisis passed.2

尽管《美国故事》比许多美国报纸更加重视美洲国家组织和联合国,但故事的大纲保持不变——肯尼迪在沙子上画了一条线。赫鲁晓夫看到自己没有机会对抗美国的强大火力,明智地做出了让步。

While Story of America gave more credit to the Organization of American States and the United Nations than did many American newspapers, the outline of the story stayed the same—Kennedy drew a line in the sand. Khrushchev, seeing that he had no chance against superior American firepower, wisely backed down.

20 世纪 60 年代中期的另一本教科书《美国历史》也对核对峙进行了类似的描述:

Another textbook from the mid-1960s, United States History, covered the nuclear standoff similarly:

苏联舰艇没有测试封锁,而是折返。世界各地的人们松了口气,尤其是在赫鲁晓夫本人做出让步之后。在与肯尼迪的换信中,苏联领导人承诺从古巴撤走进攻性武器,并允许联合国检查以核实撤走情况。作为回报,他要求美国解除封锁,不要入侵古巴。肯尼迪同意了。3

Instead of testing the blockade, the Soviet ships turned back. People everywhere breathed easier, especially after Khrushchev himself backed down. In an exchange of letters with Kennedy, the Soviet leader promised to remove offensive weapons from Cuba and to permit inspection by the United Nations to verify the removal. In return, he asked the United States to lift its blockade and not to invade Cuba. Kennedy agreed.3

《美国历史》提供了比《美国故事》更详尽的叙​​述,清楚地表明,尽管苏联总理做出了让步,但他从古巴撤回苏联导弹后得到了一些回报。

Providing an even more thorough account than Story of America, United States History made it clear that although the Soviet premier backed down, he received something in return for withdrawing the Soviet missiles from Cuba.

最后的摘录—— 《美国历史》(1966 年)中的摘录——完成了这幅图画:

One final excerpt—this one from A History of the United States (1966)—completes the picture:

运载喷气式飞机和军用物资前往古巴的苏联船只改变了航向,以免与执行封锁的美国船只或飞机遭遇。当美国的盟友和美洲国家组织强烈支持肯尼迪总统的立场,苏联总理赫鲁晓夫同意在联合国监督下拆除进攻性武器。作为回报,他要求美国解除封锁并同意不入侵古巴……。这场危机的结果是美国和自由世界的明显胜利。它让赫鲁晓夫相信,肯尼迪总统准备在必要时使用武力来阻止苏联对拉丁美洲任何国家的统治。因此,这位苏联领导人决定不冒险在古巴推行他的计划,从而引发核浩劫。4

Soviet ships carrying jet aircraft and military supplies to Cuba changed course rather than risk an encounter with American ships or planes enforcing the blockade. When America’s allies and the Organization of American States gave strong support to President Kennedy’s stand, Soviet Premier Khrushchev agreed to remove the offensive weapons under UN supervision. In return, he asked that the United States lift its blockade and agree not to invade Cuba…. The outcome of the crisis was a clear-cut victory for the United States and the free world. It convinced Khrushchev that President Kennedy was prepared to use force if necessary to block Soviet domination of any country in Latin America. The Soviet leader had therefore decided not to risk touching off a nuclear holocaust by pushing his plans in Cuba.4

《美国历史》社论接续《美国历史》和《美国故事》的篇章,称美国和世界的胜利是“明确的”。更重要的是,这场胜利无疑让苏联人相信美国人确实是一个强大的对手。课程?只有强大的美国准备好展示其军事实力才能保证世界和平。

Picking up where United States History and Story of America left off, A History of the United States editorialized that the victory for the United States and the world was “clear-cut.” More importantly, the triumph had unquestionably convinced the Soviets that the Americans were indeed a formidable opponent. The lesson? Only a strong America ready to flex its military muscle could guarantee world peace.

教科书遗漏了什么

What the Textbooks Missed

虽然事件发生后不久对古巴导弹危机的描述各不相同,但总体叙述基本相同:苏联人通过将核武器转移到古巴来赌博——这是一个冒险但经过深思熟虑的举动,旨在在冷战中赢得上风。但美国从未退缩。凭借美国空中和海上战术力量的支持,肯尼迪总统和他的前通讯顾问无所畏惧地俯视着苏联。作为移除苏联导弹的回报,美国承诺不会入侵古巴,而在猪湾惨败之后,无论如何,这看起来都不太有希望。胜利已经很明显了。另一个家伙眨了眨眼。

While accounts of the Cuban Missile Crisis written shortly after the event vary, their general narrative is largely the same: The Soviets gambled by moving nuclear weapons into Cuba—a risky but calculated move designed to win the upper hand in the Cold War. But the United States never flinched. With the strength of tactical American air and sea power behind him, President Kennedy and his Ex Comm advisors fearlessly stared down the Soviets. In return for removal of Soviet missiles, the Americans promised not to invade Cuba, which, after the Bay of Pigs fiasco, didn’t look too promising anyway. The victory was clear. The other guy blinked.

如果古巴导弹危机的故事在 20 世纪 60 年代中期停止展开,教科书的叙述或多或少是正确的,或者至少是尽可能正确的。但在接下来的几十年里,古巴核对峙的故事将继续以微妙但重要的方式发生变化。

If the story of the Cuban Missile Crisis had stopped unfolding in the mid-1960s, the textbook narratives would have gotten it more or less right, or at least as right as they could have gotten it. But over the next few decades, the story of the nuclear standoff in Cuba would continue to change in subtle but important ways.

以 1962 年尼基塔·赫鲁晓夫 (Nikita Khrushchev) 向肯尼迪总统发出的两封谈判信为例。第一封信日期为 10 月 26 日星期五,要求美国承诺永远不会入侵古巴,以换取苏联从古巴撤走导弹。岛。第二封信日期为 10 月 27 日星期六,要求美国从土耳其撤走中程木星导弹。许多教科书对这场危机的描述都遗漏了有关这些信件的所有细节。确实提到这些问题的教科书通常会解释说,前通讯员建议肯尼迪忽略第二封信并接受第一封信中的提议,而他确实这样做了。

Take, for instance, the two negotiation letters that Nikita Khrushchev sent to President Kennedy in 1962. The first letter, dated Friday, October 26, demanded that the United States promise to never invade Cuba, in return for the removal of Soviet missiles from the island. The second letter, dated Saturday, October 27, demanded that the United States remove its intermediate-range Jupiter missiles from Turkey. Many textbook accounts of the crisis leave out all details about the letters. The textbooks that do address them usually explain that Ex Comm advised Kennedy to ignore the second letter and accept the offer in the first, which he did.

“双字母”的叙述——肯尼迪对第一个字母采取行动,而忽略第二个字母——在很大程度上得到了罗伯特·F·肯尼迪的《十三天》的证实(来源 8.1),这是总统的兄弟在危机期间保存的日记,在罗伯特·肯尼迪遇刺一年后出版。罗伯特·肯尼迪在日记中描述了在 10 月 27 日星期六执行委员会开会后,他如何给苏联大使阿纳托利·F·多勃雷宁 (Anatoly F. Dobrynin) 打电话,并要求当晚在司法部会面。美国愿意讨论从土耳其撤走导弹的可能性,但并非没有条件。正如罗伯特·肯尼迪在日记中所报道的那样,他告诉多勃雷宁,“在这种威胁下不可能有任何交换条件或任何安排。” 5他在给国务卿迪安·腊斯克的绝密备忘录中呼应了这一信息(来源 8.2)。“按照您的指示,”总检察长写信给腊斯克,“我重申,不可能达成任何形式的协议,缓和世界其他地区紧张局势的任何措施在很大程度上取决于苏联和赫鲁晓夫先生采取的行动。”在古巴并立即采取行动。” 6

The “two-letter” account—Kennedy acting on the first and ignoring the second—is largely corroborated by Robert F. Kennedy’s Thirteen Days (Source 8.1), the diary kept by the president’s brother during the crisis, published a year after RFK’s assassination. In his diary, Robert Kennedy described how after Ex Comm met on Saturday, October 27, he phoned Soviet Ambassador Anatoly F. Dobrynin and asked to meet that night at the Department of Justice. The Americans were willing to discuss the possibility of withdrawing missiles in Turkey, but not without conditions. As RFK reported in his diary, he told Dobrynin that “there could be no quid pro quo or any arrangement made under this kind of threat.”5 He echoed this message in a top-secret memo to Secretary of State Dean Rusk (Source 8.2). “Per your instructions,” the attorney general wrote to Rusk, “I repeated that there could be no deal of any kind and that any steps toward easing tensions in other parts of the world largely depended on the Soviet Union and Mr. Khrushchev taking action in Cuba and taking it immediately.”6

这是情节变得复杂的地方。当我们转向苏联人讲述这个故事时,我们得到了不同的印象。前苏联总理赫鲁晓夫在其去世后出版的回忆录(来源8.3)不仅声称美国人认真对待第二封信,而且还采取了行动。根据赫鲁晓夫的说法,肯尼迪欣然同意了这封信的条款——“作为撤回我们导弹的交换条件,[肯尼迪总统]将从土耳其和意大利撤走美国导弹”7——而且这种交换确实是一种交换条件(拉丁语意思是“一物换一物”),而罗伯特·肯尼迪恰恰否认了这一点。

Here is where the plot thickens. When we turn to the Soviets to tell the story, we get a different impression. Former Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev’s memoir (Source 8.3), published after his death, not only claims that the Americans took the second letter seriously, but also that they acted on it. According to Khrushchev, Kennedy willingly agreed to the letter’s terms—“In exchange for withdrawal of our missiles, [President Kennedy] would remove American missiles from Turkey and Italy”7—and that the exchange was indeed a quid pro quo (Latin, meaning “one thing for another”), the very thing Robert Kennedy denied.

肯尼迪总统是否移除了针对莫斯科的导弹以换取苏联从古巴撤出导弹?20 世纪 60 年代中后期的教科书从未提及过这样的交易。但那样的话,他们怎么能呢?毕竟,罗伯特·肯尼迪的《十三天》直到 1969 年才出版,而赫鲁晓夫的《赫鲁晓夫记忆:最后的遗嘱》则是 1974 年出版的。

Did President Kennedy remove missiles aimed at Moscow in return for the withdrawal of Soviet missiles from Cuba? Textbook accounts from the mid- and late-1960s never mention such a deal. But then, how could they? After all, Robert Kennedy’s Thirteen Days wasn’t published until 1969, while Khrushchev’s Khrushchev Remembers: The Last Testament was published in 1974.

这两本书出版后出版的教科书又如何呢?一言不发。正如 1995 年出版的教科书《美国是》的作者所写:

And what about textbooks published after both books came out? Not a word. As the authors of the textbook America Is, published in 1995, wrote:

尽管美国已经向苏联表明了它的言行一致,但导弹的研制工作仍在继续。随后,10 月 26 日,肯尼迪总统听取了苏联总理赫鲁晓夫的讲话。几天后,他们就古巴问题达成协议。苏联同意拆除导弹。结果,美国同意结束隔离,不再入侵古巴。8

Although the United States had shown the Soviet Union that it meant what it said, work on the missiles continued. Then, on October 26, President Kennedy heard from Soviet Premier Khrushchev. In a few days, they came to terms on Cuba. The Soviet Union agreed to remove the missiles. As a result, the United States agreed to end the quarantine and not to invade Cuba.8

《美国国歌》 (2007 年)中讲述的故事虽然更详细,但大致相同:

Though more detailed, the story presented in The American Anthem (2007) is much the same:

[肯尼迪]收到赫鲁晓夫的一封信,表示如果美国承诺永远不会拆除导弹入侵古巴。第二天,他收到了赫鲁晓夫一封更为严厉的信,要求美国从土耳其撤走导弹。执行委员会建议肯尼迪忽略第二封信并接受第一封信中的提议。总统这样做了,赫鲁晓夫宣布他将拆除这些导弹。9

[Kennedy] received a letter from Khrushchev offering to remove the missiles if the United States pledged never to invade Cuba. The next day he received a tougher letter from Khrushchev demanding that the United States remove its missiles from Turkey. The Ex Comm advised Kennedy to ignore the second letter and accept the offer in the first letter. The president did so, and Khrushchev announced he would dismantle the missiles.9

虽然后者的教科书叙述包括赫鲁晓夫信件的故事,但它完全否认肯尼迪同意从土耳其撤走木星导弹以换取苏联从古巴撤军的可能性。

While the latter textbook account includes the story of Khrushchev’s letters, it rejects outright the possibility that Kennedy agreed to remove Jupiter missiles from Turkey in exchange for a Soviet withdrawal from Cuba.

1962 年肯尼迪总统及其顾问是否同意与苏联达成交换条件的问题是一个引人入胜的历史争议。事实上,我们对这一事件的全部认识都取决于此。如果没有达成协议,那么传统的冷战叙事仍然完好无损。使我们免于第三次世界大战的,是靠蛮力,而不是不为公众所知的幕后交易。另一方面,如果苏联的观点是正确的——该决议是通过斡旋达成协议而达成的——我们就必须修改我们的理解,并承认战争之所以避免,是因为超级大国达成了双方都能接受的协议。

The question of whether President Kennedy and his advisors agreed to a quid pro quo with the Soviets in 1962 is a fascinating historical controversy. In fact, our whole understanding of this incident hinges on it. If there was no deal, then the traditional Cold War narrative remains intact. Brute strength, not back-room deals kept from public view, saved us from World War III. On the other hand, if the Soviet view is right—that resolution came about by brokering a deal—we have to revise our understanding, and accept that war was averted because the superpowers came up with an agreement that both sides could live with.

学生的教科书经常忽视或淡化这一点。但第二封信向学生表明,虽然教科书是一个很好的起点,但即使是最庞大的书目也是不完整的。事实上,有时他们完全错了。仔细阅读教科书不仅教会学生采取批判性的阅读方法,还可以向他们展示需要通过历史资料来解谜,以找出到底发生了什么。这种方法,我们称之为“开放教科书”,将文本从总是发布最终结论的惰性权威,转变为必须像其他任何方法一样进行批判性评估的又一个历史来源。10

Students’ textbooks often overlook or minimize. But the second letter shows students that while textbooks are a good place to start, even the most massive tomes are incomplete. Sometimes, in fact, they’re just plain wrong. Scrutinizing the textbook not only teaches students to take a critical approach to reading, it can show them the need to puzzle through historical sources in order to find out what really happened. This approach, what we refer to as “Opening Up the Textbook,” changes the text from an inert authority, always issuing the final word, to one more historical source that must be critically evaluated like any other.10

 

 

所以发生了什么事?古巴导弹危机的核心问题很简单:肯尼迪政府是否同意从土耳其边境撤走指向莫斯科的导弹,以换取苏联从古巴撤出导弹?简而言之,“另一个家伙眨眼”的故事与其说是历史,不如说是神话?

So, What Happened? The question at the heart of the Cuban Missile Crisis is simple: Did the Kennedy Administration agree to remove missiles pointed at Moscow from the Turkish border in exchange for the withdrawal of Soviet missiles from Cuba? In short, is the story of “the other fellow blinking” more myth than history?

虽然赫鲁晓夫的书证明存在明确的交换,但美国绝密备忘录形式的证据与这一说法相矛盾。罗伯特·肯尼迪向迪恩·腊斯克传达的信息很明确:“我回答说,不可能有任何交换条件——无法达成此类交易。这是北约必须考虑的问题。” 11

While Khrushchev’s book makes the case that there was an explicit exchange, evidence in the form of a top-secret American memo contradicts that claim. Robert Kennedy’s message to Dean Rusk was clear: “I replied that there could be no quid pro quo—no deal of this kind could be made. This was a matter that had to be considered by NATO.”11

我们相信罗伯特·肯尼迪只是因为他站在我们这一边吗?不。了解历史并不等于支持你最喜欢的球队。我们有义务考虑所有证据,即使它来自另一方。

Do we believe RFK just because he was on our side? No. Historical understanding is not the same as rooting for your favorite team. We are obliged to consider all of the evidence, even when it comes from the other side.

历史学家不是在无尽的“他说/她说”中筛选,而是寻求确凿的证据。佐证是历史推理的核心实践,是比较不同的叙述以拼凑出所发生事件的准确图像的行为。历史学家不是简单地接受一个故事的一个版本而不是另一个版本,而是努力发现重叠和出发点。他们问,不同账户的共同点是什么?他们什么时候不同意?他们的分歧在哪里?什么可以解释这些差异?账目如何核对?

Instead of sifting through endless mountains of he said/she said, historians seek corroborating evidence. Corroboration, a practice at the core of historical reasoning, is the act of comparing different accounts in order to piece together an accurate picture of what happened. Rather than simply accepting one version of a story over another, historians work to discover points of overlap and departure. What, they ask, is common to the various accounts? When do they disagree? Where do they diverge? What might explain these discrepancies? How might the accounts be reconciled?

因此,是否相信尼基塔·赫鲁晓夫或罗伯特·肯尼迪的问题不仅仅是一个冷战谜题,而且是历史学家必须做的侦探工作的学生的光辉榜样。因此,为了解开这个谜团,我们必须求助于其他文献来帮助我们重建这个故事。

Thus, the question of whether to believe Nikita Khrushchev or Robert Kennedy is not just a Cold War riddle, but a shining example for students of the detective work historians must do. And so, to solve this riddle, we must turn to other documents to help us reconstruct the story.

例证:除了罗伯特·肯尼迪的日记和尼基塔·赫鲁晓夫的回忆录之外,还有一份秘密公报谈到了第二封信的问题。这份文件是苏联官员在相关事件发生三十年后发布的,它是从多勃雷宁大使的华盛顿办公室发回莫斯科的加密传输文件,证实了为什么历史学家通常会从时间的流逝和新信息的出现中受益。

Case in point: In addition to Robert Kennedy’s diary and Nikita Khrushchev’s memoir, a secret communiqué addressed the matter of the second letter. Released by Soviet officials 3 decades after the events in question, the document—a coded transmission from Ambassador Dobrynin’s Washington office back to Moscow—confirms why historians generally benefit from the passage of time, and the surfacing of new information.

在这份苏联解体后发布的秘密电报中(来源 8.4),多勃雷宁描述了他与 RFK 的会面。执行委员会收到赫鲁晓夫的第二封信后不久,总统的兄弟打电话给多勃雷宁安排会面。两位消息人士均同意这一点。据多勃雷宁和肯尼迪称,双方就美国保证不入侵古巴达成了一致。但罗伯特·肯尼迪声称在从土耳其撤走木星导弹的问题上立场坚定,而苏联大使却讲述了一个不同的故事:

In this secret cable, released following the dissolution of the Soviet Union (Source 8.4), Dobrynin describes his meeting with RFK. Shortly after the Ex Comm received Khrushchev’s second letter, the president’s brother called Dobrynin to schedule a meeting. Both sources agreed to this. The two sides, according to both Dobrynin and Kennedy, reached agreement on American assurances not to invade Cuba. But where RFK claimed to stand firm on the question of removing Jupiter missiles from Turkey, the Soviet Ambassador tells a different story:

“那土耳其呢?” 我问 R. 肯尼迪。

“And what about Turkey?” I asked R. Kennedy.

“如果这是实现我之前提到的监管的唯一障碍,那么总统认为解决这个问题没有任何无法克服的困难,”R.肯尼迪回答道。“总统面临的最大困难是公开讨论土耳其问题。此前,在土耳其部署导弹基地是根据北约理事会的一项特别决定进行的。现在宣布美国总统单方面决定从土耳其撤出导弹基地——这将损害北约的整个结构和美国作为北约领导者的地位……。然而,肯尼迪总统也准备在这个问题上与赫鲁晓夫达成一致。我认为,为了从土耳其撤走这些基地,”R.肯尼迪说,“我们需要 4 到 5 个月的时间。” 12

“If that is the only obstacle to achieving the regulation I mentioned earlier, then the president doesn’t see any un-surmountable difficulties in resolving this issue,” replied R. Kennedy. “The greatest difficulty for the president is the public discussion of the issue of Turkey. Formerly the deployment of missile bases in Turkey was done by a special decision of the NATO Council. To announce now a unilateral decision by the president of the USA to withdraw missile bases from Turkey—this would damage the entire structure of NATO and the U.S. position as the leader of NATO…. However, President Kennedy is ready to come to agree on that question with N.S. Khrushchev, too. I think that in order to withdraw these bases from Turkey,” R. Kennedy said, “we need 4–5 months.”12

多勃雷宁的说法似乎解决了问题,证实了赫鲁晓夫的说法并破坏了两者罗伯特·肯尼迪的故事和“另一个人眨眼”的理论。据多勃雷宁称,美国人收到了赫鲁晓夫的第二封信,并很快要求召开一次会议,商定交换条件的细节。

Dobrynin’s account seems to settle the matter, corroborating Khrushchev’s account and undermining both Robert Kennedy’s story and the “the other guy blinked” theory. According to Dobrynin, the Americans received Khrushchev’s second letter and quickly called for a meeting in which the details of the quid pro quo were hashed out.

尽管如此,苏联大使写这份电报可能还有其他一些动机——历史学家在使用这份文件来证实赫鲁晓夫的故事版本时必须考虑到这一点。导弹危机发生时,多勃雷宁年仅43岁,是担任苏联驻美国大使最年轻的人,当年才抵达华盛顿。历史学家推测,也许这位年轻的大使只是在告诉赫鲁晓夫他想听的话,即不惜一切代价保住自己的职位。他们问道,不然的话,多勃雷宁怎么能在这个职位上坚持到 1986 年,在此期间有如此多的苏联总理被赶下台?除此之外,声称已达成一项协议也符合苏联的利益。谁愿意承认自己屈服于压力?最好通过声称已经达成协议来挽回面子。

Still, the Soviet ambassador may have had some other motives for writing the cable—something historians must consider when using the document to corroborate Khrushchev’s version of the story. Dobrynin, only 43 at the time of the missile crisis, was the youngest person to serve as Soviet Ambassador to the United States, and had only arrived in Washington that year. Perhaps, historians have speculated, the young ambassador was simply telling Khrushchev what he wanted to hear, that is, doing whatever it took to keep his job. How else, they ask, could Dobrynin have survived in that post until 1986, with so many Soviet premiers ousted during that time span? Beyond that, it was in the Soviets’ interest to claim that a deal had been brokered. Who wants to admit that they caved in to pressure? Better to save face by claiming a deal had been reached.

即便如此,如果有人试图认为多勃雷宁的叙述是可靠的,那么罗伯特·肯尼迪的日记仍然存在问题。毕竟,真正的佐证利用了不同的有利位置。美国对于从土耳其撤走导弹的立场——肯尼迪的日记,在 1968 年 RFK 被暗杀后由他的朋友特德·索伦森编辑成《十三天》 ——表明不存在任何交换条件

Even so, were one tempted to view Dobrynin’s account as reliable, there is still the question of Robert Kennedy’s diary. Real corroboration, after all, utilizes different vantage points. And the Americans’ position regarding the withdrawal of missiles from Turkey—Kennedy’s diary, edited into Thirteen Days by his friend Ted Sorenson after RFK was assassinated in 1968—indicates that there was no quid pro quo.

或者确实如此?

Or does it?

为了寻找进一步确凿的证据,历史侦探们可能会转向 1989 年在莫斯科举行的一次会议,索伦森在会上发表的言论在当时堪称重磅炸弹。索伦森说他想“坦白”,他宣布:“我是罗伯特·肯尼迪这本书的编辑。而且,”他继续说道,“日记非常明确地表明(导弹协议)是协议的一部分。” 但由于导弹交易在 1969 年《十三天》出版时仍然是个秘密,索伦森亲自担任审查员并“将其从[RFK]日记中删除”(来源 8.5)。这是一种礼貌的说法,是他自己捏造了历史。

In search of further corroborating evidence, historical detectives might turn to a 1989 conference in Moscow in which Sorensen dropped what was, at the time, nothing short of a bombshell. Saying that he wanted to make a “confession,” Sorensen stunned his audience by announcing: “I was the editor of Robert Kennedy’s book. And,” he continued, “the diary was very explicit that [the missile agreement] was part of the deal.” But because the missile deal was still a secret in 1969, when Thirteen Days was published, Sorenson took it upon himself to act as censor and “edit that out of [RFK’s] diaries” (Source 8.5). This is a polite way of saying that he took it upon himself to fabricate history.

我们盘点一下吧。正如苏联人声称的那样(特德·索伦森现在也承认),赫鲁晓夫的第二封信并没有被美国人“忽视”。肯尼迪总统也没有简单地对苏联总统进行恶意攻击。相反,美国人进行了外交谈判并与对手达成协议。

Let’s take stock. Khrushchev’s second letter, as the Soviets claimed, and Ted Sorenson now admits, was not “ignored” by the Americans. Nor did President Kennedy simply give his Soviet counterpart the evil eye. Rather, the Americans engaged in diplomatic negotiations and reached a deal with their adversaries.

但如果是这样的话,这就引出了一个问题:为什么?如果美国海军可以实施对古巴的封锁,并且美国空军可以在必要时摧毁岛上的苏联导弹,那么肯尼迪为什么要与苏联谈判呢?事实证明,答案很简单:古巴导弹危机期间美国战术军事优势的影响被夸大了。据学者托马斯·布兰顿称,肯尼迪的参谋长联席会议告诉总统,空袭不能保证摧毁部署在古巴的所有苏联导弹。13

But if that is the case, it begs the question: Why? Why would Kennedy negotiate with the Soviets if the American Navy could enforce its blockade of Cuba and the American Air Force could, if necessary, destroy the Soviet missiles on the island? The answer, it turns out, is a simple one: The impact of America’s tactical military advantage during the Cuban Missile Crisis was overstated. Kennedy’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, according to scholar Thomas Blanton, told the President that air strikes could not guarantee the destruction of all Soviet missiles placed in Cuba.13

为什么要保密?为什么肯尼迪政府继续宣扬毫不眨眼的边缘政策?为什么不坦白一项阻止第三次世界大战的安排,特别是如果成本只是肯尼迪总统所说的“土耳其一些过时的导弹”呢?14

Why all the secrecy? Why did the Kennedy Administration continue to perpetuate stories of unblinking brinkmanship? Why not come clean about an arrangement that prevented World War III, especially if the cost was only what President Kennedy called “some obsolete missiles in Turkey?”14

多勃雷宁在电报中提到的一个问题是肯尼迪担心公开宣布该协议可能会损害北约以及美国作为联盟领导者的地位。肯尼迪执行委员会的另一位成员麦乔治·邦迪证实了这一担忧,并指出“尽管付出了一切代价,保密还是避免了美国内部和大西洋联盟内部出现严重的政治分歧。” 15

One issue, which Dobrynin mentions in his cable, was Kennedy’s fear that publicly announcing the agreement might hurt NATO as well as the United States’s position as alliance leader. McGeorge Bundy, another member of Kennedy’s Ex Comm, confirmed this concern, noting that “for all its costs, secrecy prevented a serious political division both within the United States and in the Atlantic Alliance.”15

对肯尼迪家族来说,如果真相在冷战狂热最激烈的时候被揭露,他们可能会对苏联的侵略表现出软弱态度。肯尼迪在 1960 年总统竞选中曾批评时任副总统尼克松允许共产主义政权在距佛罗里达海岸 90 英里的地方夺取政权。因此,作为总统,肯尼迪煞费苦心地对古巴表现得积极主动,特别是在猪湾事件惨败和暗杀菲德尔·卡斯特罗失败的消息被泄露之后。司法部长罗伯特·肯尼迪也有自己的总统野心,正如苏联大使阿纳托利·多勃雷宁在回忆录中回忆的那样,罗伯特·肯尼迪担心“如果有关土耳其导弹的秘密协议曝光,他的前景可能会受到损害”。16无论是出于对国家安全的担忧,还是出于对自己选举前景的担忧,肯尼迪团队都相信,关于侵略性和实力的故事比关于外交和灵活性的故事更有效。

At stake for the Kennedys was the possibility that if the truth had been revealed at the height of Cold War mania, they would appear soft on Soviet aggression. JFK, in the 1960 presidential race, had criticized then-Vice President Nixon for allowing a Communist regime to seize power 90 miles off the Florida coast. Consequently, as president, Kennedy took great pains to appear proactive toward Cuba, particularly after the Bay of Pigs fiasco and leaks about failed attempts to assassinate Fidel Castro. Attorney General Robert Kennedy had his own presidential ambitions, and as Soviet Ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin recalled in his memoir, RFK feared that “his prospects could be damaged if this secret deal about the missiles in Turkey were to come out.”16 Whether out of concern for national security or their own electoral future, the Kennedy team believed that a story about aggressiveness and strength would play better than one about diplomacy and flexibility.

电影做对了吗?电影经常会出错。然而,在激发学生兴趣和帮助学生想象曾经的世界方面,电影是教师武器库中最强大的工具之一。最近的一部影片讲述了古巴导弹危机背后的真实历史,片名取自罗伯特·肯尼迪的日记。自然,老师们会怀疑《十三天》是否正确。17 号

Did the Movie Get It Right? Movies often get it wrong. And yet, in terms of galvanizing student interest and helping students imagine the world as it once was, film is among the most powerful tools in a teacher’s arsenal. One recent motion picture, featuring the factual history behind the Cuban Missile Crisis, takes its title from Robert Kennedy’s diary; naturally, teachers will wonder if Thirteen Days got it right.17

就美国和苏联之间的外交谈判而言,这部电影出人意料地准确,讲述了大多数教科书叙述中省略的细节。是的,肯尼迪总统盯着苏联船只,迪安·腊斯克观察到另一个人眨了眼睛。但影片也讲述了肯尼迪兄弟灵活适应威胁、努力建立共识的故事执行委员会成员赞成隔离而不是空袭或入侵。

In terms of the diplomatic negotiations between the Americans and the Soviets, the movie is surprisingly accurate, recounting details that most textbook narratives omit. Yes, President Kennedy stares down Soviet ships and Dean Rusk observes that the other guy blinked. But the film also tells the story of the Kennedy brothers flexibly adapting to the threat, working to build consensus among the members of Ex Comm in favor of quarantine rather than air raid or invasion.

这部电影真实地描述了向专栏作家沃尔特·李普曼透露的关于可能的导弹交换的消息、苏联的第二封信,以及罗伯特·肯尼迪和多勃雷宁大使之间的会面,在会面中承诺从土耳其撤出美国导弹,以换取苏联从土耳其撤军。古巴并对该协议保密。

The film realistically depicts the leak to columnist Walter Lippmann about a possible missile exchange, the second letter from the Soviets, and the meeting between Robert Kennedy and Ambassador Dobrynin in which promises were made to withdraw American missiles from Turkey in exchange for a Soviet withdrawal from Cuba and to keep the agreement secret.

但是,正如学者菲利普·布伦纳指出的那样,这部电影还以观众兴趣的名义发明了历史。18也许最严重的扭曲是肯尼迪助手肯尼·奥唐纳在危机中扮演的关键角色(由凯文·科斯特纳扮演,该角色做出关键决定,例如指示海军飞行员否认在古巴上空侦察飞行期间遭到射击)。同样值得怀疑的是驻华盛顿的克格勃特工在多大程度上代表赫鲁晓夫总理发言。

But, as scholar Philip Brenner notes, the film also invents history in the name of viewer interest.18 Perhaps the most significant distortion is the apparently pivotal role played by Kennedy aide Kenny O’Donnell in the crisis (played by Kevin Costner, the character makes critical decisions, like instructing Navy pilots to deny being fired on during reconnaissance flights over Cuba). Also questionable is the degree to which a KGB agent stationed in Washington speaks for Premier Khrushchev.

如果为了戏剧性的叙述而包含这些不准确之处,可能很容易被原谅。更令人担忧的是学生们观看《十三天》后的整体印象。布伦纳回忆起他与十几岁的女儿关于苏联为何在古巴部署导弹的对话,她指出,她从影片中得出的结论很简单:苏联人很糟糕。这部电影很少将苏联(或古巴人)描绘成邪恶势力,但由于它只关注美国对危机的反应,所以很难不同情美国对一个看似非理性和好战的敌人的同情。此外,支持主队也是很自然的事情。

Such inaccuracies, if included for the sake of dramatic narrative, might easily be forgiven. Of greater concern is the overall impression students will get from watching Thirteen Days. Recalling a conversation he had with his teenage daughter about why the Soviets put missiles in Cuba, Brenner notes that the conclusion she drew from the film was a simple one: The Soviets were bad. The film rarely portrays the Soviets (or the Cubans, for that matter) as malevolent forces, but because it focuses exclusively on the American response to the crisis, it’s hard to resist sympathizing with the United States against a seemingly irrational and belligerent foe. Besides, it’s natural to root for the home team.

但苏联将导弹运入古巴的决定并非凭空而来。约翰·F·肯尼迪在其短暂的任期内扩大了美国对苏联的军备优势,使美国在远程轰炸机和导弹方面拥有近十比一的优势。19为了安抚俄罗斯内部的强硬派,并保护古巴免受美国支持的另一次秘密行动的影响,赫鲁晓夫决定在该岛上部署中程弹道导弹。布伦纳表示,此举“是一种比建造许多可以从苏联发射的新型洲际弹道导弹更便宜的方式,可以对美国的攻击提供一定的威慑作用。” 20尽管俄罗斯人可能将世界带入了核灾难的边缘,但他们这样做并不是没有原因的。

But the Soviet decision to move missiles into Cuba did not come out of nowhere. During his short time in office, John F. Kennedy had expanded America’s arms advantage over the Soviet Union, giving the United States a nearly ten-to-one advantage in long-range bombers and missiles.19 In an effort to placate hard-liners within the Russian ranks, as well as protect Cuba against another U.S.-backed covert operation, Khrushchev decided to place intermediate-range ballistic missiles on the island. Such a move, states Brenner, was “a cheaper way to provide some deterrent against a feared U.S. attack than to build many new intercontinental ballistic missiles that could be launched from the Soviet Union.”20 While the Russians may have brought the world to the brink of nuclear disaster, they did not do so without cause.

影片中省略了这段叙述。因此,没有更广泛背景的观众(阅读:你的学生)很可能会相信美国是纯洁的好人,而苏联是非理性的战争贩子。相反,古巴导弹危机不是一个善与恶的故事,而是一场同时表现出弱点和力量、防御和侵略、克制和好战的对手之一。最终,正是老式的外交——双方都没有得到想要的一切的秘密交易——避免了第三次世界大战。

That narrative is omitted from the film. As a consequence, viewers without a broader context (read: your students) may well walk away believing that the United States was the unsullied good guy and the Soviets irrational warmongers. Instead, rather than a story of good and evil, the Cuban Missile Crisis is one of rivals simultaneously displaying weakness and strength, defense and aggression, restraint and belligerence. In the end, it was plain old-fashioned diplomacy—secret deals in which neither side got everything it wanted—that averted World War III.

为什么要讲授古巴导弹危机?

Why Teach About the Cuban Missile Crisis?

一个逐渐揭晓的故事。学生们很难理解,有时我们距离事件越远,我们对它的了解就越多。然而,在许多情况下,这正是我们了解过去的方式。古巴导弹危机的教学提供了一个成熟的机会,向学生展示我们对历史的理解如何变化。随着时间的推移,历史学家和事件之间的距离越来越远,谜题的碎片开始逐渐清晰。毕竟,历史从来都不是完全透明的——如果是这样,历史学家就不需要如此努力地将其拼凑在一起。前苏联总理之子谢尔盖·赫鲁晓夫表示,“肯尼迪总统不想在历史上留下任何痕迹,他害怕被指责迎合共产党人。对此我们无能为力……重要的是他们,总统和神父,21毫不奇怪,整理古巴导弹危机的故事对历史学家来说是一个挑战。但随着解密文件的曝光,以及特德·索伦森等参与者的揭露,古巴导弹危机的故事正变得更加清晰。

A Story That Gradually Reveals Itself. It’s hard for students to grasp that sometimes the more distant we are from an event, the more we understand about it. Yet, in many instances, this is exactly how we come to know the past. Teaching the Cuban Missile Crisis presents a ripe opportunity to show students how our understanding of history changes. As time puts distance between historians and an event, pieces of the puzzle start to fall into place. History, after all, is never completely transparent—if it were, historians wouldn’t need to work so hard piecing it together. According to Sergei Khrushchev, the son of the former Soviet premier, “President Kennedy didn’t want to leave any traces to go down in history and he was afraid of being accused of catering to the communists. Nothing could be done about that … the important thing was that they, the President and Father, understood each other’s aspirations and could trust each other.”21 Not surprisingly, putting together the story of the Cuban Missile Crisis has been a challenge for historians. But with declassified documents coming to light, and revelations from participants like Ted Sorenson, the story of the Cuban Missile Crisis is becoming clearer.

证实消息来源。由于历史记载可能经常相互矛盾,历史学家们需要证实消息来源,以努力调和差异。从这个意义上说,历史推理和法理推理有很多重叠之处。因此,古巴导弹危机是向学生介绍历史学家所做的侦探工作类型的绝佳机会。一旦人们开始证实 1962 年事件的来源,就会发现这个故事与传统的叙述截然不同。正如一位学者所说,事实并不是肯尼迪赢得了对赫鲁晓夫的蔑视,而是这场冲突最终“只是因为两人都愿意冒着羞辱的风险,而不是世界末日的风险”而得以解决。22通过引入新的消息来源,历史学家不仅确定肯尼迪政府同意从土耳其撤出导弹,而且他们认为向我们广大公众隐瞒这一事实很重要。

Corroborating Sources. Because historical accounts may often contradict one another, historians corroborate sources in an effort to reconcile discrepancies. In this sense, historical reasoning and jurisprudential reasoning have a lot of overlap. Thus, the Cuban Missile Crisis is a great opportunity to introduce students to the type of detective work that historians do. Once one begins to corroborate sources about the events of 1962, the story turns out to be quite different from the traditional narrative. As one scholar has put it, the reality is less that Kennedy won a staredown against Khrushchev, and more that the conflict was ultimately “resolved only because both men were willing to risk humiliation rather than Armageddon.”22 By bringing in new sources, historians determine not only that the Kennedy Administration agreed to withdraw missiles from Turkey, but that they felt it was important to conceal this fact from us, the public at large.

思考历史的教训。古巴经常吸取的教训导弹危机是美国必须毫不畏惧地对抗敌人的侵略。例如,肯尼迪和约翰逊政府奉行的美国对越南外交政策是基于这样一种观点,即只有不屈的军事力量才能应对共产主义的威胁。

Thinking About the Lessons Drawn from History. The frequently drawn lesson from the Cuban Missile Crisis is that the United States must unflinchingly face down the aggressions of its enemies. The American foreign policy in Vietnam pursued by the Kennedy and Johnson administrations, for instance, was driven by the view that only unyielding military force could meet the Communist threat.

但从历史上看,毫不眨眼的边缘政策的教训似乎是不准确的。斯坦福大学历史学家巴顿·伯恩斯坦(Barton Bernstein)询问,对肯尼迪在导弹危机中“胜利”的信念是否可能影响了林登·约翰逊(Lyndon Johnson),因为他“甚至不顾顾问的劝告,为自己在 1966 年至 1968 年在东南亚的胜利而奋斗”。伯恩斯坦接着表示,如果约翰逊总统和他的美国同胞们一起了解 1962 年 10 月和解协议的真相,他可能会“在心理上,甚至在政治上,更自由地改变政策”。23但他没有。因此,古巴导弹危机的故事不仅强调了正确对待历史的重要性,还提出了我们可以从过去吸取哪些类型的教训的问题。

But it appears that the lesson of unblinking brinkmanship is historically inaccurate. Stanford historian Barton Bernstein asks whether a belief in Kennedy’s “‘victory’” in the missile crisis may have influenced Lyndon Johnson as he “struggled on, even against the counsel of advisors, for his own triumph in Southeast Asia in 1966–1968.” Bernstein goes on to suggest that President Johnson might have felt “psychologically, and even politically, more free to change policy if he had known, along with his fellow Americans, the truth of the October 1962 settlement.”23 But he did not. Thus, the story of the Cuban Missile Crisis not only highlights the importance of getting history right, it raises questions about what types of lessons we can draw from the past.

您将如何使用这些材料?

How Might You Use These Materials?

场景 1(2-3 小时课程)。第三次世界大战是因为“另一个人眨眼”而被阻止的吗?或者说,世界末日被欺骗了,因为美国和苏联外交官达成了妥协,让双方都保住了面子?在接受任何版本为真实之前,使用这些主要来源让学生参与证实历史记录。这个场景提供了对第 6 章“开放教科书”策略的不同看法。

Scenario 1 (2–3 Hour Lesson). Was World War III prevented because the “other guy blinked”? Or was Armageddon cheated because American and Soviet diplomats reached a compromise that allowed both parties to save face? Use these primary sources to engage students in corroborating historical accounts before accepting any version as true. This scenario offers a different take on the “Opening Up the Textbook” strategy from Chapter 6.


CCSS #6、#9

CCSS #6, #9


在本课开始时,要求学生阅读一本关于古巴导弹危机的教科书(可以是本章列出的内容之一,也可以是教科书中的内容)。无论书中是否提到赫鲁晓夫的第二封信,问题仍然存在:我们如何知道肯尼迪政府如何回应?

Begin this lesson by asking students to read a textbook account of the Cuban Missile Crisis (either one of those listed in this chapter or the one from your textbook). Whether or not the book mentions Khrushchev’s second letter, the question remains: How can we know how the Kennedy Administration responded?

将学生分成小组,给他们罗伯特·肯尼迪致国务卿的绝密备忘录(改编版本请参阅来源 8.2a ,原始“绝密”政府文件请参阅来源 8.2b ),要求他们考虑到底发生了什么在会见苏联大使多勃雷宁期间。给小组时间讨论,然后向他们提供另外两份文件——肯尼迪日记的摘录(来源 8.1)和尼基塔·赫鲁晓夫的回忆录(来源 8.3))。学生们可能会进行基本形式的佐证,并指出由于罗伯特·肯尼迪的两份文件是一致的,因此他的说法一定是真实的。其他学生会得出这样的结论:这是肯尼迪的言论反对赫鲁晓夫的言论,是我们这边反对他们的言论。

Divide students into groups, giving them Robert Kennedy’s top-secret memorandum to the Secretary of State (see Source 8.2a for the adapted version, and Source 8.2b for the original “Top Secret” government document), asking them to consider what really happened during his meeting with Soviet Ambassador Dobrynin. Allow the groups time to discuss, then provide them with two additional documents—the excerpts from Kennedy’s diary (Source 8.1) and Nikita Khrushchev’s memoir (Source 8.3). Students will likely engage in a rudimentary form of corroboration, noting that because the two documents by Robert Kennedy are consistent, his account must be true. Other students will come to the conclusion that it’s Kennedy’s word against Khrushchev’s, our side against theirs.

此时,向学生提供多勃雷宁的解密电报(来源 8.4),并询问其中讲述的故事如何影响他们对所发生事件的理解。然后,向他们提供 Ted Sorenson 的“自白”(来源 8.5)。

At this point, give students Dobrynin’s declassified cable (Source 8.4), and ask how the story it tells affects their understanding of what happened. Then, provide them with Ted Sorenson’s “confession” (Source 8.5).

最后,让学生从电影《十三天》中选择一段摘录,并根据他们在本课中学到的信息来解释它的准确或不准确之处。学生必须提供来自文件或其他研究的证据,以帮助他们做出关于电影准确性的决定。

Finally, have students select an excerpt from the movie Thirteen Days and explain how it is accurate or inaccurate based on what they learned from the sources in this lesson. Students must include evidence from the documents or other research that led them to their decision about the film’s accuracy.

图像


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 质疑教科书和电影中的叙事叙述
  • Questioning narrative accounts in textbooks and film
  • 证实消息来源
  • Corroborating sources
  • 基于证据的思考和论证
  • Evidence-based thinking and argumentation
  • 根据证据构建叙述
  • Constructing a narrative based on evidence

场景 2(1-2 小时课程)。为何要隐瞒真相?这个场景是第一个场景的扩展,旨在让学生练习思考历史背景。

Scenario 2 (1–2 Hour Lesson). Why hide the truth? This scenario, which expands on the first, is designed to give students practice in thinking about historical context.


CCSS #1

11–12 #3

CCSS #1

11–12 #3


首先,引导学生完成前面场景中描述的分析和讨论。对于这种情况,请学生考虑为什么肯尼迪政府希望向美国公众隐瞒他们的外交谈判。

First, lead students through the analysis and discussion rounds described in the previous scenario. For this scenario, ask students to consider why the Kennedy Administration wished to conceal their diplomatic negotiations from the American public.

向学生提供 1960 年约翰·F·肯尼迪和理查德·尼克松之间的总统辩论的文字摘录(来源 8.6)以及 1961 年理查德·古德温给肯尼迪总统的绝密备忘录(来源 8.7)。第一份文件提供了肯尼迪在竞选总统时承诺对古巴采取强硬态度的证据,而第二份文件表明猪湾入侵失败给肯尼迪政府带来了多大的问题。接下来,向学生提供阿纳托利·多勃雷宁(Anatoly Dobrynin)回忆录的摘录(来源8.8),其中表明,由于罗伯特·肯尼迪有总统野心,因此他不能对古巴或共产主义表现出手软。图形组织者(工具8.1)将帮助学生记录他们的想法。

Provide students with transcript excerpts of a 1960 presidential debate between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon (Source 8.6) and a 1961 top-secret memo from Richard Goodwin to President Kennedy (Source 8.7). The first document provides evidence that Kennedy had promised to be tough on Cuba when running for president, while the second indicates how problematic the failed Bay of Pigs invasion was for the Kennedy Administration. Next, provide students with the excerpt from Anatoly Dobrynin’s memoir (Source 8.8), which indicates that because Robert Kennedy had presidential ambitions, he could not afford to look soft on Cuba or Communism. The graphic organizer (Tool 8.1) will help students keep track of their thinking.

在留出时间讨论这些文件的重要性及其含义后,要求学生单独或分组工作。考虑给学生布置一篇论文作业,解释为什么肯尼迪政府向美国公众隐瞒与苏联的谈判。鼓励学生包含并解释导致他们得出结论的文件的摘录。

After allowing time to discuss the importance of these documents and what they indicate, ask the students to work individually or in groups. Consider giving students an essay assignment to explain why the Kennedy Administration concealed their negotiations with the Soviets from the American public. Encourage students to include and explain excerpts from the documents that led them to their conclusions.

图像


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 结合资料来源和历史事件
  • Contextualizing sources and historical events
  • 根据来源建立对过去事件的解释
  • Building an explanation of a past event based on sources

场景 3(1 小时课程)。当你站在别人的立场上时,过去是什么样子?这个场景使用了苏联教科书来帮助学生理解观点并练习细读。

Scenario 3 (1 Hour Lesson). What does the past look like when you’re standing in the other guy’s shoes? This scenario uses a Soviet textbook to help students understand perspective and also to give them practice in close reading.


CCSS

#4

CCSS

#4


为学生提供其他国家教科书的摘录以及他们如何描述古巴导弹危机(工具 8.2)。这些摘录让学生练习仔细阅读并磨练他们对历史叙事语言的敏感性。在古巴教科书的第一个摘录中,使用“雇佣军”一词会提醒细心的读者注意这本书的立场。然而,学生可能不明白其中的推论,也不知道“雇佣兵”的含义。即使他们错过了这条线索,下一句中的“敌对”一词也应该提醒他们。在来自苏联书籍的第二段摘录中,第一句中的形容词“严重”提醒读者,这种描述不太可能来自美国教科书。然而,仅靠这条线索并不能解决问题,直到随后的句子落实到位:该书解释说,是美国的一系列行动引发了冲突,而苏联方面似乎没有挑衅。

Provide students with excerpts from other nations’ textbooks and how they describe the Cuban Missile Crisis (Tool 8.2). These excerpts give students practice in close reading and honing their sensitivity to the language of historical narrative. In the first excerpt, from a Cuban textbook, use of the word “mercenary” will alert an attentive reader to the book’s stance. Students, however, may not grasp the inference or know what “mercenary” means. Even if they miss this clue, the word “hostile” in the next sentence should tip them off. In the second excerpt, from a Soviet book, the adjective “severe” in the first sentence alerts the reader that this description is not likely from a U.S. textbook. However, this clue alone does not settle the matter until subsequent sentences fall into place: The book explains it was a sequence of American actions that set off the conflict, with seemingly no provocation from the Soviet side.


此场景中的目标技能列表

Targeted list of skills in this scenario


  • 视角识别
  • Perspective recognition
  • 细读
  • Close reading

来源和工具

Sources and Tools

资料来源8.1 :十三摘录修改

SOURCE 8.1: EXCERPT FROM THIRTEEN DAYS (MODIFIED)


注:罗伯特·肯尼迪是 1962 年美国总统约翰·肯尼迪和司法部长的兄弟。在这篇日记摘录中,他记录了他与苏联大使多勃雷宁就古巴导弹问题进行的谈判。

Note: Robert Kennedy was the brother of President John Kennedy and Attorney General of the United States in 1962. In this diary excerpt, he writes about his negotiations with Soviet Ambassador Dobrynin regarding the missiles in Cuba.

晚上 7 点 15 分左右,我给多勃雷宁大使打电话,请他来司法部。我们于 7 点 45 分在我的办公室见面。我首先告诉他,我们知道古巴导弹基地的工作仍在继续,并且在过去几天里已经加快了……。

I telephoned Ambassador Dobrynin about 7:15 P.M. and asked him to come to the Department of Justice. We met in my office at 7:45. I told him first that we knew that work was continuing on the missile bases in Cuba and that in the last few days it had been expedited….

我们必须承诺在明天之前拆除这些基地。我不是给他们最后通牒,而是事实陈述。他应该明白,如果他们不拆除这些基地,我们就会拆除它们。肯尼迪总统非常尊重大使所在的国家及其人民的勇气。也许他的国家可能觉得有必要采取报复行动;但在这一切结束之前,不仅会有美国人死去,还有俄罗斯人死去。

We had to have a commitment by tomorrow that those bases would be removed. I was not giving them an ultimatum but a statement of fact. He should understand that if they did not remove those bases, we would remove them. President Kennedy had great respect for the Ambassador’s country and the courage of its people. Perhaps his country might feel it necessary to take retaliatory action; but before that was over, there would be not only dead Americans but dead Russians as well.

他问我美国提出了什么建议,我告诉他肯尼迪总统刚刚转递给赫鲁晓夫的信。他提出了我们从土耳其撤走导弹的问题。我说,在这种威胁或压力下不可能有任何交换条件或任何安排,归根结底,这是北约必须做出的决定。不过,我说过,肯尼迪总统长期以来一直渴望从意大利和土耳其撤走这些导弹。他前段时间就下令拆除,我们判断,危机结束后不久,那些导弹就会消失。

He asked me what offer the United States was making, and I told him of the letter that President Kennedy had just transmitted to Khrushchev. He raised the question of our removing the missiles from Turkey. I said that there could be no quid pro quo or any arrangement made under this kind of threat or pressure and that in the last analysis this was a decision that would have to be made by NATO. However, I said, President Kennedy had been anxious to remove those missiles from Italy and Turkey for a long period of time. He had ordered their removal some time ago, and it was our judgment that, within a short time after this crisis was over, those missiles would be gone.

我说过肯尼迪总统希望我们两国之间有和平的关系。他希望解决我们在欧洲和东南亚面临的问题。他希望在核武器控制方面取得进展。然而,只有当危机过去后,我们才能在这些问题上取得进展。时间已经不多了。我们只剩下几个小时了——我们需要立即得到苏联的答复。我说我们必须第二天才能拿到。

I said President Kennedy wished to have peaceful relations between our two countries. He wished to resolve the problems that confronted us in Europe and Southeast Asia. He wished to move forward on the control of nuclear weapons. However, we could make progress on these matters only when the crisis was behind us. Time was running out. We had only a few more hours—we needed an answer immediately from the Soviet Union. I said we must have it the next day.


资料来源:罗伯特·肯尼迪,《十三天:古巴导弹危机回忆录》(纽约:新美国图书馆,1969 年),107-109。

Source: Robert F. Kennedy, Thirteen Days: A Memoir of the Cuban Missile Crisis (New York: New American Library, 1969), 107–109.


字库

WORD BANK


加急——加速,迅速处理

expedited—speeded up, dealt with quickly

最后通牒——最后的要求

ultimatum—a final demand

报复性的——旨在伤害某人

retaliatory—designed to hurt someone back

quid pro quo——交换的东西

quid pro quo—something done in exchange


资料来源8.2 A摘自ROBERT K ENNEDYDEAN RUSK备忘录修改_

SOURCE 8.2A: EXCERPT FROM ROBERT KENNEDY’S MEMO TO DEAN RUSK (MODIFIED)


注:在这份官方备忘录中,司法部长罗伯特·肯尼迪向国防部长迪恩·腊斯克报告了他与苏联大使会面的情况。

Note: In this official memo, Attorney General Robert Kennedy reports to Secretary of Defense Dean Rusk about his meeting with the Soviet Ambassador.

应腊斯克国务卿的要求,我于 10 月 27 日星期六晚上 7 点 15 分左右致电多勃雷宁大使。我问他是否愿意在八点一刻来司法部。我们在我的办公室见面…… 他问我……我们提出什么报价。我说一封信已经……被交给苏联大使馆,其中指出……应该拆除导弹基地,并从古巴撤走所有进攻性武器。作为回报,如果古巴、卡斯特罗和共产党结束他们的颠覆活动……我们将同意维持和平……并且不允许从美国领土入侵。

At the request of Secretary Rusk, I telephoned Ambassador Dobrynin at approximately 7:15 p.m. on Saturday October 27th. I asked him if he would come to the Justice Department at quarter of eight. We met in my office…. He asked me … what offer we were making. I said a letter had … been transmitted to the Soviet Embassy which stated … that the missile bases should be dismantled and all offensive weapons should be removed from Cuba. In return, if Cuba and Castro and the Communists ended their subversive activities … we would agree to keep peace … and not permit an invasion from American soil.

然后他问我赫鲁晓夫关于从土耳其撤走导弹的另一项建议。我回答说,不可能有任何交换条件——无法达成此类交易……。根据你的指示,我重申,不可能达成任何形式的协议,缓和世界其他地区紧张局势的任何步骤在很大程度上取决于苏联和赫鲁晓夫先生在古巴采取行动并立即采取行动。

He then asked me about Khrushchev’s other proposal dealing with the removal of the missiles from Turkey. I replied that there could be no quid pro quo—no deal of this kind could be made…. Per your instructions I repeated that there could be no deal of any kind and that any steps toward easing tensions in other part of the world largely depended on the Soviet Union and Mr. Khrushchev taking action in Cuba and taking it immediately.


资料来源:司法部长罗伯特·肯尼迪 (Robert Kennedy) 于 1962 年 10 月 30 日致国防部长迪安·腊斯克 (Dean Rusk) 的绝密备忘录。

Source: Top-secret memo from Robert Kennedy, Attorney General, to Secretary of Defense Dean Rusk, October 30, 1962.


字库

WORD BANK


已发送— 已发送

transmitted—sent

拆除——拆开

dismantled—taken apart

颠覆性的——意图伤害或推翻政府

subversive—intended to hurt or overthrow the government

quid pro quo——交换的东西

quid pro quo—something done in exchange


资料来源8.2 B罗伯特·肯尼迪( ROBERT K ENNEDY) 致迪安·拉斯克(Dean Rusk )的绝密备忘录原件

SOURCE 8.2B: TOP-SECRET MEMO FROM ROBERT KENNEDY TO DEAN RUSK (ORIGINAL)


图像

图像


来源http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/621030%20Memorandum%20for%20Sec.%20of%20State.pdf

Source: Available at http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/621030%20Memorandum%20for%20Sec.%20of%20State.pdf

 

 

资料来源8.3 赫鲁晓夫回忆

SOURCE 8.3: KHRUSHCHEV REMEMBERS


注:尼基塔·赫鲁晓夫是古巴导弹危机期间的苏联领导人。在他的回忆录中,他回忆起肯尼迪总统在危机期间告诉他的话。

Note: Nikita Khrushchev was the leader of the Soviet Union during the Cuban Missile Crisis. In his memoir, he recalls what President Kennedy told him during the crisis.

肯尼迪总统表示,作为从土耳其和意大利撤走美国导弹的交换条件。

President Kennedy said that in exchange for the withdrawal of our missiles, he would remove American missiles from Turkey and Italy.


资料来源:摘自《赫鲁晓夫回忆录:最后的遗嘱》。爱德华·克兰克肖 (Edward Crankshaw) 的介绍、评论和注释,译。和编辑。作者:Strobe Talbott(波士顿:Little, Brown,1974),512。

Source: Excerpt from Khrushchev Remembers: The Last Testament. Introduction, commentary, and notes by Edward Crankshaw, trans. and ed. by Strobe Talbott (Boston: Little, Brown, 1974), 512.

 

 

来源8.4通往莫斯科的多勃宁电缆(修改

SOURCE 8.4: DOBRYNIN CABLE TO MOSCOW (MODIFIED)


注:古巴导弹危机期间,阿纳托利·多勃雷宁担任苏联驻美国大使。在这里,他回顾了与美国司法部长罗伯特·肯尼迪的谈判。

Note: During the Cuban Missile Crisis, Anatoly Dobrynin was the Soviet Ambassador to the United States. Here, he recalls his negotiations with U.S. Attorney General Robert Kennedy.

“那土耳其呢?” 我问 R. 肯尼迪。

“And what about Turkey?” I asked R. Kennedy.

“如果这是实现我之前提到的监管的唯一障碍,那么总统认为解决这个问题没有任何不可克服的困难,”R.肯尼迪回答道。“总统面临的最大困难是公开讨论土耳其问题……。

“If that is the only obstacle to achieving the regulation I mentioned earlier, then the president doesn’t see any insurmountable difficulties in resolving this issue,” replied R. Kennedy. “The greatest difficulty for the president is the public discussion of the issue of Turkey….

“然而,肯尼迪总统也准备在这个问题上与赫鲁晓夫达成一致。我认为,为了从土耳其撤走这些基地,”R.肯尼迪说,“我们需要 4 到 5 个月的时间。考虑到北约框架内现有的程序,这是美国政府做到这一点所需的最短时间。在整个土耳其问题上,”肯尼迪补充道,“如果赫鲁晓夫总理同意我所说的话,我们可以继续交换意见……。然而,总统不能就土耳其这方面公开发表任何言论。” ……R.肯尼迪随后警告说,他对土耳其的评论是极其保密的;除了他和他的兄弟之外,华盛顿只有两三个人知道这件事。

“However, President Kennedy is ready to come to agree on that question with N.S. Khrushchev, too. I think that in order to withdraw these bases from Turkey,” R. Kennedy said, “we need 4–5 months. This is the minimal amount of time necessary for the U.S. government to do this, taking into account the procedures that exist within the NATO framework. On the whole Turkey issue,” R. Kennedy added, “if Premier N.S. Khrushchev agrees with what I’ve said, we can continue to exchange opinions…. However, the president can’t say anything public in this regard about Turkey.” … R. Kennedy then warned that his comments about Turkey are extremely confidential; besides him and his brother, only 2–3 people know about it in Washington.

……与我会面后,他立即去见总统,正如 R. 肯尼迪所说,他现在几乎所有的时间都花在总统身上。

… After meeting with me he immediately went to see the president, with whom, as R. Kennedy said, he spends almost all his time now.


资料来源:Anatoly Dobrynin,来自俄罗斯外交部档案,翻译自 NHK 提供的副本,载于 Richard Ned Lebow 和 Janice Gross Stein,《我们都输掉了冷战》(新泽西州普林斯顿:普林斯顿大学出版社,1994 年),附录,523–526 ,稍作修改。http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/621027%20Dobrynin%20Cable%20to%20USSR.pdf

Source: Anatoly Dobrynin, from Russian Foreign Ministry archives, translation from copy provided by NHK, in Richard Ned Lebow and Janice Gross Stein, We All Lost the Cold War (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994), Appendix, 523–526, with minor revisions. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/621027%20Dobrynin%20Cable%20to%20USSR.pdf


字库

WORD BANK


无法克服的——无法解决

insurmountable—unable to be solved

NATO-北大西洋公约组织

NATO—North Atlantic Treaty Organization


来源8.5 :西奥多·索伦森(修改

SOURCE 8.5: THEODORE SORENSON (MODIFIED)


注:西奥多·索伦森是罗伯特·肯尼迪著作《十三天》的编辑。这本书公开了肯尼迪关于古巴导弹危机的日记。索伦森在这里承认,他在日记发表之前就从日记中获取了绝密信息。

Note: Theodore Sorenson was the editor of Robert Kennedy’s book Thirteen Days. The book made Kennedy’s diary of the Cuban Missile Crisis public. Here, Sorenson admits that he took top-secret information out of the diary before it was published.

肯尼迪总统认识到,对于赫鲁晓夫主席从古巴撤走导弹来说,如果他能同时对主席团的同事们说:“而且我们已经得到保证,这些导弹将从土耳其出来。” 因此,在执行委员会会议之后(1962 年 10 月 27 日晚上),我相信几乎所有人都知道,一小群人在肯尼迪总统的办公室开会,他在国务卿的建议下指示罗伯特·肯尼迪[院长]腊斯克——将这封信转交给多勃雷宁大使,转交给赫鲁晓夫主席,但口头补充信中未提及的内容:导弹将来自土耳其。

The president [Kennedy] recognized that, for Chairman Khrushchev to withdraw the missiles from Cuba, it would be undoubtedly helpful to him if he could say at the same time to his colleagues on the Presidium, “And we have been assured that the missiles will be coming out of Turkey.” And so, after the ExComm meeting [on the evening of 27 October 1962], as I’m sure almost all of you know, a small group met in President Kennedy’s office, and he instructed Robert Kennedy—at the suggestion of Secretary of State [Dean] Rusk—to deliver the letter to Ambassador Dobrynin for referral to Chairman Khrushchev, but to add orally what was not in the letter: that the missiles would come out of Turkey.

多勃雷宁大使认为罗伯特·肯尼迪的书没有充分表达土耳其导弹“协议”是解决危机的一部分。在这里,我要向美国方面的同事以及在场的其他人坦白。我是罗伯特·肯尼迪这本书的编辑。事实上,这是那十三天的日记。他的日记里非常明确地表明这是交易的一部分;但当时即使在美国方面,除了我们六个人参加了那次会议之外,这仍然是一个秘密。所以我亲自从他的日记中删除了这一点,这就是为什么大使说日记不如他的谈话那么明确的原因是有道理的。

Ambassador Dobrynin felt that Robert Kennedy’s book did not adequately express that the “deal” on the Turkish missiles was part of the resolution of the crisis. And here I have a confession to make to my colleagues on the American side, as well as to others who are present. I was the editor of Robert Kennedy’s book. It was, in fact, a diary of those thirteen days. And his diary was very explicit that this was part of the deal; but at that time it was still a secret even on the American side, except for the six of us who had been present at that meeting. So I took it upon myself to edit that out of his diaries, and that is why the Ambassador is somewhat justified in saying that the diaries are not as explicit as his conversation.


资料来源:Theodore Sorensen,《回到边缘:古巴导弹危机莫斯科会议记录》,1989 年 1 月 27-28 日,编辑,Bruce J. Allyn、James G. Blight 和 David A. Welch(Lanham, MD:美国大学出版社,1992),92-93。

Source: Theodore Sorensen, in Back to the Brink: Proceedings of the Moscow Conference on the Cuban Missile Crisis, January 27–28, 1989, eds., Bruce J. Allyn, James G. Blight, and David A. Welch (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1992), 92–93.


字库

WORD BANK


主席团——苏联政府高级成员

Presidium—high-ranking members of the Soviet government

执行委员会——肯尼迪总统最亲密的顾问

ExComm—President Kennedy’s closest advisors

明确的——明确说明

explicit—clearly stated


资料来源8.6:肯尼迪/尼克松辩论(修改

SOURCE 8.6: KENNEDY/NIXON DEBATES (MODIFIED)


注:1960 年,约翰·肯尼迪和理查德·尼克松竞选总统。当时肯尼迪是参议员,尼克松是副总统。以下是选举前辩论的节选,辩论中两人讨论了 1960 年古巴的地位。

Note: In 1960, John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon ran for president. Kennedy was a senator and Nixon was Vice President at the time. What follows is an excerpt from a debate prior to the election in which the men discuss the status of Cuba in 1960.

保罗·尼文:副总统[尼克松]先生,肯尼迪参议员昨晚表示,[艾森豪威尔/尼克松]政府必须对古巴[失去共产党控制]承担责任。您能否将该声明的有效性与您自己在之前的竞选活动中关于杜鲁门政府对中国输给共产党负责的声明的有效性进行比较?

PAUL NIVEN: Mr. Vice President [Nixon], Senator Kennedy said last night that the [Eisenhower/Nixon] Administration must take responsibility for the loss of Cuba [to Communist control]. Would you compare the validity of that statement with the validity of your own statements in previous campaigns that the Truman Administration was responsible for the loss of China to the Communists?

理查德·尼克松:肯尼迪参议员对我在古巴发生的事情中所扮演的角色(或所谓的角色)提出了一些非常强烈的批评……。关于古巴,我要澄清一件事。毫无疑问,我们将在那里捍卫我们的权利。毫无疑问,如果关塔那摩遭到袭击,我们将保卫它。毫无疑问,古巴的自由人民——那些想要自由的人民——将得到支持,他们将获得自由。不,古巴并没有失败,我不认为肯尼迪参议员的这种失败主义言论对局势有任何帮助。

RICHARD NIXON: Senator Kennedy has made some very strong criticisms of my part—or alleged part—in what has happened in Cuba…. Now with regard to Cuba, let me make one thing clear. There isn’t any question but that we will defend our rights there. There isn’t any question but that we will defend Guantanamo if it’s attacked. There also isn’t any question but that the free people of Cuba—the people who want to be free—are going to be supported and that they will attain their freedom. No, Cuba is not lost, and I don’t think this kind of defeatist talk by Senator Kennedy helps the situation one bit.

弗兰克·麦吉:肯尼迪参议员,您愿意发表评论吗?

FRANK McGEE: Senator Kennedy, would you care to comment?

先生。肯尼迪:首先,除了现在之外,我从未暗示过古巴已经失败。我在昨晚的讲话中表示,我认为古巴有一天会再次获得自由。我对政府政策的批评在于政府未能利用其巨大影响力说服古巴政府举行自由选举,特别是在 1957 年和 1958 年。我希望有一天(古巴)会崛起;但我认为,如果我们继续执行近年来对古巴采取的政策,这一数字不会上升。

MR. KENNEDY: In the first place I’ve never suggested that Cuba was lost except for the present. In my speech last night I indicated that I thought that Cuba one day again would be free. Where I’ve been critical of the Administration’s policy [is in] the failure of the Administration to use its great influence to persuade the Cuban government to hold free elections, particularly in 1957 and 1958. I hope some day [Cuba] will rise; but I don’t think it will rise if we continue the same policies toward Cuba that we did in recent years.


资料来源:第二次肯尼迪-尼克松总统辩论记录,1960 年 10 月 7 日,可访问http://www.debates.org/index.php?page=october-7-1960-debate-transcript

Source: Transcript of the Second Kennedy-Nixon Presidential Debate, October 7, 1960, available at http://www.debates.org/index.php?page=october-7-1960-debate-transcript


字库

WORD BANK


关塔那摩——美国在古巴的军事基地

Guantanamo—American military base in Cuba

达到——获得或完成

attain—to get or to accomplish

失败主义者——消极的,反映失败的

defeatist—negative, reflecting defeat


资料来源8.7:致总统的备忘录修改

SOURCE 8.7: MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT (MODIFIED)


注:在这份致肯尼迪总统的绝密备忘录中,理查德·古德温 (Richard Goodwin) 报告了他 1961 年与切·格瓦拉 (Che Guevara) 的会面。格瓦拉在帮助古巴共产党上台的过程中发挥了重要作用。

Note: In this top-secret memo to President Kennedy, Richard Goodwin reports on his 1961 meeting with Che Guevara. Guevara played a major role in helping the Communists come to power in Cuba.

绝密

TOP SECRET

总统备忘录

MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT

主题:与指挥官埃内斯托 [Che] 的对话

Subject: Conversation with Commandante Ernesto [Che]

古巴的格瓦拉

Guevara of Cuba

这次谈话发生在 8 月 17 日晚凌晨 2 点。巴西和阿根廷代表团的几位成员做出了努力……安排我和切之间的会面。这显然是在切的同意下完成的,即使不是他的敦促……。

The conversation took place the evening of August 17 at 2 A.M. Several members of the Brazilian and Argentine delegations had made efforts … to arrange a meeting between me and Che. This was obviously done with Che’s approval, if not his urging….

他随后表示,他们不想与美国达成谅解,因为他们知道这是不可能的。他们想要一份[临时协议]……。他认为我们应该提出这样一个公式,因为我们要担心民意,而他可以接受任何事情而不用担心民意……。

He then said that they didn’t want an understanding with the U.S., because they knew that was impossible. They would like a [temporary agreement]…. He thought we should put forth such a formula because we had public opinion to worry about whereas he could accept anything without worrying about public opinion….

然后他接着说,他非常感谢我们的[猪湾]入侵——这对他们来说是一次伟大的政治胜利——使他们得以巩固——并将他们从一个受屈的小国转变为一个平等的国家。 。

He then went on to say that he wanted to thank us very much for the [Bay of Pigs] invasion—that it had been a great political victory for them—enabled them to consolidate—and transformed them from an aggrieved little country to an equal.


资料来源:理查德·古德温,“总统备忘录”,1961 年 8 月 22 日,http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/bayofpigs/19610822.pdf

Source: Richard Goodwin, “Memorandum for the President,” August 22, 1961, http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/bayofpigs/19610822.pdf

 

 

资料来源8.8:多·奥勃宁回忆录

SOURCE 8.8: DOBRYNIN MEMOIR


注:阿纳托利·多勃雷宁在此回顾了他在古巴导弹危机期间与罗伯特·肯尼迪的谈判。

Note: Here, Anatoly Dobrynin recalls his negotiations with Robert Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

第二天,也就是 10 月 30 日,罗伯特·肯尼迪告诉我,总统确认了关闭美国在土耳其的导弹基地的协议,虽然我们可以确定会采取适当的措施,但不会在公开场合将他与美国的导弹基地联系起来。决定以及围绕古巴的事件。他表示,白宫不准备正式签署该协议,即使是通过严格保密的信件,而且美方宁愿不就如此敏感的问题进行任何通信。罗伯特·肯尼迪私下里补充说,有一天——谁知道呢?——他可能会竞选总统,如果有关土耳其导弹的秘密协议曝光,他的前景可能会受到损害。

The next day, October 30, Robert Kennedy informed me that the president confirmed the accord on closing American missile bases in Turkey, and that while we could be sure that the appropriate steps would be taken, no connection was to be drawn in public between his decision and the events surrounding Cuba. He said that the White House was not prepared to formalize the accord, even by means of strictly confidential letters, and that the American side preferred not to engage in any correspondence on so sensitive an issue. Very privately, Robert Kennedy added that some day—who knows?—he might run for president, and his prospects could be damaged if this secret deal about the missiles in Turkey were to come out.

我将肯尼迪的答复转达给了莫斯科。两天后,我告诉罗伯特·肯尼迪,赫鲁晓夫同意这些考虑,并且毫不怀疑总统会信守诺言……。

I relayed the Kennedy reply to Moscow. Two days later, I told Robert Kennedy that Khrushchev agreed to those considerations and had no doubt that the president would keep his word….

赫鲁晓夫未能坚持肯尼迪的公开承诺,这让他付出了沉重的代价。肯尼迪被宣布为危机中的大赢家,因为没有人知道这项秘密交易。赫鲁晓夫因从古巴撤走我们的导弹而感到羞辱,但没有取得任何明显的好处。

Khrushchev’s failure to insist on a public pledge by Kennedy cost him dearly. Kennedy was proclaimed the big winner in the crisis because no one knew about the secret deal. Khrushchev had been humiliated into withdrawing our missiles from Cuba with no obvious gain.


资料来源:摘自阿纳托利·多勃雷宁 (Anatoly Dobrynin),《机密:莫斯科驻美国六位冷战总统的大使 (1962–1986)》(纽约:泰晤士报图书,1995 年),90。

Source: Excerpt from Anatoly Dobrynin, In Confidence: Moscow’s Ambassador to America’s Six Cold War Presidents (1962–1986) (New York: Times Books, 1995), 90.

 

 

工具8.1:场景2图形组织

TOOL 8.1: GRAPHIC ORGANIZER FOR SCENARIO 2

 

 

文件说了什么?

What does the document say?

这说明了美国为何想要隐瞒真相?

What light does it shed on why the U.S. might have wanted to conceal the truth?

来源 8.6:肯尼迪/尼克松辩论

Source 8.6: Kennedy/Nixon debates

 

 

 

 

来源 8.7:古德温给肯尼迪总统的备忘录

Source 8.7: Goodwin memo to President Kennedy

 

 

 

 

来源 8.8:多勃雷宁回忆录

Source 8.8: Dobrynin memoir

 

 

 

 

 

 

工具8.2 教科书摘录_

TOOL 8.2: TEXTBOOK EXCERPTS



摘录1

Excerpt 1

猪湾雇佣兵旅的失败使美国认为摧毁古巴革命的唯一途径是直接军事干预。美国立即开始了准备工作…… 作为其敌对计划的一部分,美国考虑对关塔那摩海军基地进行自我侵略,这将使他们能够指责古巴并为入侵该岛提供借口。为此,基地美方不断挑衅。海军陆战队向古巴领土射击,有时持续几个小时。

The defeat of the mercenary Brigade at the Bay of Pigs made the U.S. think that the only way of crashing the Cuban Revolution was through a direct military intervention. The U.S. immediately embarked on its preparation…. As part of their hostile plans, the U.S. considered a self-inflicted aggression in connection with the Guantanamo Naval Base that would allow them to blame Cuba and provide a pretext for invading the island. With that aim, constant provocations took place from the U.S. side of the base; Marines shooting toward Cuban territory, sometimes for several hours.


这段摘录来自教科书吗

Does this excerpt come from a textbook from

  1. 俄罗斯
  2. Russia
  3. 古巴
  4. Cuba
  5. 美国
  6. United States
  7. 大不列颠
  8. Great Britain

哪些单词和短语可以让您了解 except 的出处?

What words and phrases give you clues about where this except is from?


摘录2

Excerpt 2

1960年,美国对古巴实施严厉的经济制裁,拒绝向该岛供应石油,并削减对古巴最大、最重要的出口产品糖的购买。被迫做出选择,古巴政府于 1961 年夏天将古巴的石油工业、糖加工厂和其他美国在古巴的企业国有化。作为回应,美国对古巴实施了经济封锁,停止贸易并禁止古巴进入古巴。美国到岛上旅游。1960 年 9 月,国会通过了一项法律,拒绝美国向任何在经济或军事上援助古巴的国家提供对外援助……。在这种严峻的形势下,苏联和其他共产主义国家介入购买古巴糖,并为该国提供石油和其他必需品。

In 1960 the United States took severe economic sanctions against Cuba, refusing to supply oil to the island, and cutting back on the purchases of sugar, Cuba’s largest and most important export. Forced to make a choice, the Cuban government nationalized the oil industry, sugar processing plants, and other American-owned businesses in Cuba in the summer of 1961. In response, the United States set up an economic blockade of Cuba, stopping trade and prohibiting American tourism to the island. In September 1960, Congress passed a law denying American foreign aid to any nation that assisted Cuba economically or militarily…. In this dire situation the Soviet Union and other Communist nations stepped in to purchase Cuban sugar and provide the country with oil and other essential goods.


这段摘录来自教科书吗

Does this excerpt come from a textbook from

  1. 俄罗斯
  2. Russia
  3. 古巴
  4. Cuba
  5. 美国
  6. United States
  7. 大不列颠
  8. Great Britain

哪些单词和短语可以让您了解 except 的出处?

What words and phrases give you clues about where this except is from?


资料来源:改编自国家历史教育信息交换所提供的一项活动,该信息交换所是乔治梅森大学、斯坦福教育学院和美国历史协会的合作伙伴,并由美国教育部资助,http: //teachinghistory.org/ History-content/quiz/24233,经许可使用。教科书摘录自 Dana Lindaman 和 Kyle Ward,《历史课:世界各地的教科书如何描绘美国历史》(纽约:新出版社,2004 年),297-306。

Source: Adapted from an activity provided by the National History Education Clearinghouse, a partnership of George Mason University, the Stanford School of Education, and the American Historical Association, and funded by the U.S. Department of Education, http://teachinghistory.org/history-content/quiz/24233, used by permission. Textbook excerpts from Dana Lindaman and Kyle Ward, History Lessons: How Textbooks from Around the World Portray U.S. History (New York: The New Press, 2004), 297–306.

建议资源

Suggested Resources

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/

该国家安全档案馆位于乔治华盛顿大学,包含解密文件、音频剪辑、照片和危机年表。

Housed by George Washington University, this National Security Archive includes declassified documents, audio clips, photographs, and a chronology of the crisis.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/msc_cubamenu.asp

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/msc_cubamenu.asp

阿瓦隆项目由耶鲁大学主办,收集了与古巴导弹危机相关的法律和外交文件。其中包括会议和电话交谈的备忘录以及政府官员之间的电报。

Housed by Yale University, the Avalon Project has a collection of legal and diplomatic documents related to the Cuban Missile Crisis. Memoranda from meetings and phone conversations as well as telegrams between government officials are included.

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/cuba.htm

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/cuba.htm

霍利奥克山学院国际政治学教授文森特·费拉罗 (Vincent Ferraro) 收藏着与美国外交政策有关的文件。其中一份专门关注古巴导弹危机,包括来自菲德尔·卡斯特罗和切·格瓦拉等多个角度的文件。

Housed by Mt. Holyoke College, Professor of International Politics Vincent Ferraro maintains collections of documents pertaining to American foreign policy. One focuses exclusively on the Cuban Missile Crisis and includes documents from a range of perspectives, including Fidel Castro and Che Guevara.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5OOGA-xrLyg&feature=lated

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5OOGA-xrLyg&feature=related

观看 1962 年 10 月 22 日肯尼迪向全国发表的电视讲话。肯尼迪在此概述了古巴以及美国和苏联之间迄今为止所发生的事情。

Watch Kennedy’s televised speech to the nation on October 22, 1962. Here Kennedy outlines what had been happening to date in Cuba and between the U.S. and the Soviet Union.

http://www.jfklibrary.org/Historical+Resources/JFK+in+History/Cuban+Missile+Crisis.htm

http://www.jfklibrary.org/Historical+Resources/JFK+in+History/Cuban+Missile+Crisis.htm

马萨诸塞州的肯尼迪总统图书馆和博物馆还藏有一系列专门研究古巴导弹危机的文件和资源,包括电视和广播录音。

The Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum in Massachusetts also contains a collection of documents and resources devoted to the Cuban Missile Crisis, including television and radio recordings.

 

 


附录

APPENDIX


历史/社会研究、科学和技术学科英语/语言艺术共同核心国家标准

Common Core State Standards for English/Language Arts in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects

第 61 页,历史/社会研究素养阅读标准 6-12

Page 61, Reading Standards for Literacy in History/Social Studies 6–12

以下标准从 6 年级开始;K-5 历史/社会研究、科学和技术科目的阅读标准已纳入 K-5 阅读标准。CCR 的识字标准和高中标准协同定义大学和职业准备期望——前者提供广泛的标准,后者提供额外的具体性。

The standards below begin at grade 6; standards for K–5 reading in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects are integrated into the K–5 Reading standards. The CCR anchor standards and high school standards in literacy work in tandem to define college and career readiness expectations—the former providing broad standards, the latter providing additional specificity.

图像

笔记

Notes

介绍

Introduction

1. 《纽约时报》,1921 年 4 月 4 日。

1. The New York Times, April 4, 1921.

2.请参阅 NAEP 网站上与 Pr​​osser 相关的多项选择题,http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/ITMRLS/itemdisplay.asp对吉特洛诉纽约州案的提及出现在《美国国家教育进步评估历史框架》(华盛顿特区:2006 年)第 29 页上。教育部国家评估管理委员会。

2. See the multiple-choice item relating to Prosser on the NAEP website, http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/ITMRLS/itemdisplay.asp. The reference to Gitlow v. State of New York appears on page 29 of the United States History Framework for the National Assessment of Educational Progress (Washington, D.C.: 2006). National Assessment Governing Board, Department of Education.

3.全国州长协会最佳实践中心、州立学校首席官员委员会、共同核心州立标准(历史/社会研究、科学和技术科目的素养)。(华盛顿特区:全国州长协会,2010 年)。

3. National Governors’ Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers, Common Core State Standards (Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science and Technical Subjects). (Washington, D.C.: National Governors’ Association, 2010).

4.同上,60。

4. Ibid., 60.

5. Gina Biancarosa 和 Catherine E. Snow,《阅读下一步:初中和高中读写能力行动和研究的愿景》(纽约:卡内基公司,2004 年),12。

5. Gina Biancarosa and Catherine E. Snow, Reading Next: A Vision for Action and Research in Middle and High School Literacy (New York: Carnegie Corporation, 2004), 12.

6.参见 Reed Stevens、Sam Wineburg、Leslie Herrenkohl 和 Philip Bell,“对学校科目的比较理解:过去、现在和未来”,教育研究评论(2005),75 (2),125–157。

6. See Reed Stevens, Sam Wineburg, Leslie Herrenkohl, and Philip Bell, “Comparative Understanding of School Subjects: Past, Present, and Future,” Review of Research in Education (2005), 75(2), 125–157.

7.参见 Avishag Reisman,“‘基于文档的课程’:将纪律探究带入高中历史课堂并进行青少年挣扎阅读”,《课程研究杂志》 (2011),44 (2),233–264;Avishag Reisman,“像历史学家一样阅读:城市课堂中基于文献的历史课程干预”,认知与教学(2012),30(1),86-112。

7. See Avishag Reisman, “The ‘Document-Based Lesson’: Bringing Disciplinary Inquiry Into High School History Classrooms with Adolescent Struggling Readings,” Journal of Curriculum Studies (2011), 44(2), 233–264; Avishag Reisman, “Reading Like a Historian: A Document-Based History Curriculum Intervention in an Urban Classroom,” Cognition and Instruction (2012), 30(1), 86–112.

8.参见 Diane Ravitch,《语言警察:压力团体如何限制学生学习的内容》 (2003 年),以及 Tamim Ansary,“混乱机器:教科书编辑的自白”,Edutopia (2008 年),可在http://www. edutopia.org/muddle-machine

8. See Diane Ravitch, The Language Police: How Pressure Groups Restrict What Students Learn (2003), and Tamim Ansary, “The muddle machine: Confessions of a textbook editor,” Edutopia (2008), available at http://www.edutopia.org/muddle-machine.

第1章

Chapter 1

1. David A. Price,《詹姆斯敦的爱与恨:约翰·史密斯、风中奇缘和新国家之心》(纽约:Knopf,2003 年)。

1. David A. Price, Love and Hate in Jamestown: John Smith, Pocahontas, and the Heart of a New Nation (New York: Knopf, 2003).

2.同上,59。

2. Ibid., 59.

3.卡米拉·汤森 (Camilla Townsend),《波卡洪塔斯与波瓦坦困境》(Pocahontas and the Powhatan Dilemma)(纽约:Hill 和 Wang,2004 年),52。

3. Camilla Townsend, Pocahontas and the Powhatan Dilemma (New York: Hill and Wang, 2004), 52.

4.约翰·史密斯,“约翰·史密斯船长 1608 年的真实关系”,《早期弗吉尼亚的叙述》,1606-1625 年,编辑。Lyon Gardiner Tyler(纽约:Charles Scribner's Sons,1907),48。在线传真版,网址:www.americanjourneys.org/aj-074/

4. John Smith, “A True Relation by Captain John Smith 1608,” in Narratives of Early Virginia, 1606–1625, ed. Lyon Gardiner Tyler (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1907), 48. Online facsimile edition at www.americanjourneys.org/aj-074/

5.菲利普·L·巴伯 (Philip L. Barbour) 主编,《约翰·史密斯船长全集》(1580-1631),卷。2(教堂山:北卡罗来纳大学出版社,1986 年),151。也可在线获取:http://www.virtualjamestown.org/firsthand.html

5. Philip L. Barbour, ed., The Complete Works of Captain John Smith (1580–1631), vol. 2 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1986), 151. Also available online at http://www.virtualjamestown.org/firsthand.html

6. “波瓦坦”是波卡洪塔斯父亲领导的部落和酋长本人的常用名称。对于这位印度酋长来说,瓦洪苏纳科克(Wahunsunacock)可能是更准确的名字。

6. “Powhatan” is the name commonly used for both the tribe led by Pocahontas’s father and the chief himself. Wahunsunacock may be a more accurate name for the Indian chief.

7.亨利·亚当斯,“约翰·史密斯船长”,《北美评论》104 (214)(1867 年 1 月)1-30。也可在线获取:http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/moa-cgi ?notisid=ABQ7578-0104&byte=93017179 。亚当斯的文章是对查尔斯·迪恩版本的史密斯的《真实关系》和爱德华·玛丽亚·温菲尔德的《弗吉尼亚的话语》的评论,其中他质疑史密斯的真实性,但亚当斯对同样的内容进行了全面攻击。

7. Henry Adams, “Captain John Smith,” The North American Review 104 (214) (January 1867) 1–30. Also available online at http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/moa-cgi?notisid=ABQ7578-0104&byte=93017179. Adams’s article is a review of Charles Deane’s editions of Smith’s True Relation and Edward Maria Wingfield’s A Discourse of Virginia in which he questioned Smith’s truthfulness, but it is Adams who does a full assault on the same.

8. Paul Lewis,《大盗贼:约翰·史密斯传记》(纽约:David McKay Company,1966 年)。

8. Paul Lewis, The Great Rogue: A Biography of John Smith (New York: David McKay Company, 1966).

9. JA Leo Lemay,《约翰·史密斯上尉的美国梦》(夏洛茨维尔:弗吉尼亚大学出版社,1991 年)。另请参阅 JA Leo Lemay,《波卡洪塔斯救了约翰·史密斯船长吗?》(雅典:佐治亚大学出版社,1992 年)。

9. J. A. Leo Lemay, The American Dream of Captain John Smith (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1991). Also see J. A. Leo Lemay, Did Pocahontas Save Captain John Smith? (Athens: The University of Georgia Press, 1992).

10.菲利普·L·巴伯 (Philip L. Barbour),《波卡洪塔斯和她的世界:美国第一个定居点的编年史》,其中涉及印第安人和英国人的故事,特别是约翰·史密斯船长、塞缪尔·阿加尔船长和约翰·罗尔夫船长(波士顿:霍顿·米夫林, 1970)。

10. Philip L. Barbour, Pocahontas and Her World: A Chronicle of America’s First Settlement in Which Is Related the Story of the Indians and the Englishmen—Particularly Captain John Smith, Captain Samuel Argall, and Master John Rolfe (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1970).

11.这句话出自英国人乔治·珀西之口,他于 1607 年乘坐三艘船前往詹姆斯敦,并最终接替史密斯成为殖民地的领袖。在《Trewe Relacyon of the Pcedeinges and Ocurrentes of Momente》中,托马斯·盖茨爵士于 1609 年在弗吉尼亚州发生了一段从 1609 年起在 BERMUDES 上发生的事件,直到我于 1612 年离开这个国家。(称为“真正的关系”)作者:乔治·珀西,1609-1612)。也可在线获取:http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin/jamestown-browse ?id=J1063, 264)。

11. These words were used by George Percy, an Englishman who traveled on the trio of boats to Jamestown in 1607 and eventually succeeded Smith as leader of the colony. In A Trewe Relacyon of the Pcedeinges and Ocurrentes of Momente wch have hapned in Virginia from the Tyme Sr Thomas GATES was shippwrackte uppon the BERMUDES ano 1609 untill my depture outt of the Country wch was in ano Dñi 1612. (Called “A True Relation” by George Percy, 1609–1612). Also available online at http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin/jamestown-browse?id=J1063, 264).

12.请参阅对这些神话表征在殖民时期、联邦时期和罗伯特·S·蒂尔顿(Robert S. Tilton)的《风中奇缘:美国叙事的演变》(英国剑桥:剑桥大学出版社,1994 年)中的战前时期。有关学者们后来如何看待这个故事的再现的一个例子,请参见 Frederic W. Gleach, “Pocahontas at the Fair: Crafting Identities at the 1907 Jamestown Exposition,” Ethnohistory 50 (3) (Summer 2003) , 419–445 。

12. See one examination of the origins and uses of these mythic representations during the colonial, federalist, and antebellum periods in Robert S. Tilton, Pocahontas: The Evolution of an American Narrative (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1994). For one example of how scholars look at representations of the story in later years, see Frederic W. Gleach, “Pocahontas at the Fair: Crafting Identities at the 1907 Jamestown Exposition,” Ethnohistory 50 (3) (Summer 2003), 419–445.

13.汤森、波卡洪塔斯和波瓦坦困境;海伦·朗特里(Helen Rountree),《风中奇缘》、《波瓦坦》、《奥佩坎卡诺:詹姆斯敦改变的三个印第安人的生活》(夏洛茨维尔:弗吉尼亚大学出版社,2005 年)。

13. Townsend, Pocahontas and the Powhatan Dilemma; Helen Rountree, Pocahontas, Powhatan, Opechancanough: Three Indian Lives Changed by Jamestown (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2005).

14.汤森、波卡洪塔斯和波瓦坦困境,56。

14. Townsend, Pocahontas and the Powhatan Dilemma, 56.

15. E. Randolph Turner,“波瓦坦核心地区的美洲原住民史前互动”,波瓦坦外交关系编辑。海伦·朗特里(夏洛茨维尔:弗吉尼亚大学出版社,1993),76-93。

15. E. Randolph Turner, “Native American Protohistoric Interactions in the Powhatan Core Area,” Powhatan Foreign Relations, ed. Helen Rountree (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1993), 76–93.

16. Louise Woodville,“揭秘波瓦坦帝国”,人文:国家人文基金会杂志,28 (1)(2007 年 1 月/2 月),17-19。

16. Louise Woodville, “Uncovering Powhatan’s Empire,” Humanities: The Magazine of the National Endowment for the Humanities, 28 (1) (January/February 2007), 17–19.

17.汤森、波卡洪塔斯和波瓦坦困境,14。

17. Townsend, Pocahontas and the Powhatan Dilemma, 14.

18.巴伯,风中奇缘和她的世界,4。

18. Barbour, Pocahontas and Her World, 4.

19. Helen C. Rountree,《风中奇缘:成名的人质》,Sifters:美国原住民妇女的生活,编辑。Theda Perdue(牛津:牛津大学出版社,2001 年),27。

19. Helen C. Rountree, “Pocahontas: The Hostage Who Became Famous,” Sifters: Native American Women’s Lives, ed. Theda Perdue (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 27.

20. David Lowenthal,“制造遗产”,历史与记忆,10 (1)(1998 年春季)(http://www.iupress.indiana.edu/journals/history/ham10-1.html)。

20. David Lowenthal, “Fabricating Heritage,” History and Memory, 10 (1) (Spring, 1998) (http://www.iupress.indiana.edu/journals/history/ham10-1.html).

第2章

Chapter 2

1. Elias Phinney,《1775 年 4 月 19 日上午列克星敦战役的历史》(波士顿:菲尔普斯和法纳姆印刷,1825 年);Ian MG Quimby,“列克星敦和康科德战役的杜立特版画”,Winterthur Portfolio 4 (1968),83-108。

1. Elias Phinney, History of the Battle at Lexington on the Morning of the 19th of April, 1775 (Boston: Printed by Phelps and Farnham, 1825); Ian M. G. Quimby, “The Doolittle Engravings of the Battle of Lexington and Concord,” Winterthur Portfolio 4 (1968), 83–108.

2. Ezra Ripley,《1775 年 4 月 19 日康科德战斗史》(马萨诸塞州康科德:赫尔曼·阿特威尔,1832 年)。

2. Ezra Ripley, A History of the Fight at Concord on the 19th of April, 1775 (Concord, MA: Herman Atwill, 1832).

3.哈罗德·默多克,《1775 年 4 月十九日》(波士顿:霍顿·米夫林,1925 年),362。

3. Harold Murdock, The Nineteenth of April 1775 (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1925), 362.

4.同上,363。

4. Ibid., 363.

5. Arthur B. Tourtellot,《列克星敦和康科德:美国革命战争的开始》(纽约:WW Norton & Co.,1959),135。

5. Arthur B. Tourtellot, Lexington and Concord: The Beginning of the War of the American Revolution (New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1959), 135.

6.纳撒尼尔·穆利肯 (Nathaniel Mulliken) 等人的证词,载于克莱门特·索特尔 (Clement Sawtell),《关于盖奇将军指挥下国王军队的远足和蹂躏的叙述》(纽约:《纽约时报》和阿诺出版社,1968 年)。

6. Deposition of Nathaniel Mulliken et al., in Clement Sawtell, A Narrative of the Excursion and Ravages of the King’s Troops under the Command of General Gage (New York: The New York Times and Arno Press, 1968).

7.约翰·巴克(John Barker),《波士顿的英国人:约翰·巴克中尉的日记》(纽约:纽约时报和阿诺出版社,1969 年)。

7. John Barker, The British in Boston: The Diary of Lt. John Barker (New York: The New York Times & Arno Press, 1969).

8. Samuel Steinberg,《美国:自由人民的故事》(波士顿:Allyn 和 Bacon,1963 年),92,重印于 PS Bennett,《列克星敦格林发生了什么?(加利福尼亚州门洛帕克:Addison-Wesley,1970),31。

8. Samuel Steinberg, The United States: Story of a Free People (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1963), 92, reprinted in P. S. Bennett, What Happened at Lexington Green? (Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley, 1970), 31.

9.以斯拉·斯蒂尔斯 ( Ezra Stiles),《埃兹拉·斯蒂尔斯文学日记》,由耶鲁大学公司授权,富兰克林·鲍迪奇·德克斯特 (Franklin Bowditch Dexter) 编辑(纽约:查尔斯·斯克里布纳之子出版社,1901 年)。

9. Ezra Stiles, The Literary Diary of Ezra Stiles, ed., under the Authority of the Corporation of Yale University, by Franklin Bowditch Dexter (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1901).

10.参见 Sam Wineburg,《历史思维和其他非自然行为:描绘过去教学的未来》(费城:天普大学出版社,2001 年),63-88;Sam Wineburg,“NCATE 对未来的历史教师有什么话要说?不多”,Phi Delta Kappan 86 (9) (2005), 662。

10. See Sam Wineburg, Historical Thinking and Other Unnatural Acts: Charting the Future of Teaching the Past (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2001), 63–88; Sam Wineburg, “What Does NCATE Have to Say to Future Teachers of History? Not Much,” Phi Delta Kappan 86(9) (2005), 662.

11.温伯格,《历史思维和其他非自然行为:描绘过去教学的未来》,67。

11. Wineburg, Historical Thinking and Other Unnatural Acts: Charting the Future of Teaching the Past, 67.

12.同上,68。

12. Ibid., 68.

第3章

Chapter 3

1.亚伯拉罕·林肯,《1832-1858 年的演讲和著作》,编辑。唐·E·费伦巴赫(Don E. Fehrenbacher)(纽约:美国图书馆,1989 年),512。

1. Abraham Lincoln, Speeches and Writings 1832–1858, ed. Don E. Fehrenbacher (New York: Library of America, 1989), 512.

2.莱隆·贝内特 (Lerone Bennett),《安倍·林肯是白人至上主义者吗?》乌木(1968 年 2 月),35-42。

2. Lerone Bennett, “Was Abe Lincoln a White Supremacist?” Ebony (February 1968), 35–42.

3. Brian R. Dirck 主编,《林肯解放:总统与种族政治》(Dekalb:北伊利诺伊大学出版社,2007 年)。

3. Brian R. Dirck, ed., Lincoln Emancipated: The President and the Politics of Race (Dekalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 2007).

4.有关关注林肯关于种族和奴隶制观点的学术例子,请参阅德克,《林肯解放》我们的林肯:林肯和他的世界的新视角,编辑。Eric Foner(纽约:WW Norton & Co.,2008);和 Phillip M. Guerty 主编,“林肯、种族和奴隶制”,美国历史学家组织历史杂志,2007 年 10 月。

4. For examples of scholarship focused on Lincoln’s views on race and slavery, see Dirck, Lincoln Emancipated; Our Lincoln: New Perspectives on Lincoln and His World, ed. Eric Foner (New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 2008); and Phillip M. Guerty, ed., “Lincoln, Race, and Slavery,” Organization of American Historians Magazine of History, October 2007.

5.请参阅亚伯拉罕·林肯,《亚伯拉罕·林肯全集》(安娜堡:密歇根大学数字图书馆制作服务中心,2001 年),可访问http://quod.lib.umich.edu/l/lincoln/

5. See Abraham Lincoln, The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Digital Library Production Services, 2001), available at http://quod.lib.umich.edu/l/lincoln/

6.道格拉斯·L·威尔逊 (Douglas L. Wilson),《林肯之剑:总统职位和言语的力量》(纽约:Vintage Books,2006 年),6。

6. Douglas L. Wilson, Lincoln’s Sword: The Presidency and the Power of Words (New York: Vintage Books, 2006), 6.

7.大卫·赫伯特·唐纳德 (David Herbert Donald),《林肯重新思考:内战随笔》(纽约:Vintage Books,2001 年),13。

7. David Herbert Donald, Lincoln Reconsidered: Essays on the Civil War (New York: Vintage Books, 2001), 13.

8.同上,30。

8. Ibid., 30.

9. Don E. Fehrenbacher,“Only His Stepchildren:Lincoln and the Negro”,Civil War History 20 (1974), 293–310, 293,引自 Richard Carwardine,《林肯:充满目标和权力的一生》(纽约:阿尔弗雷德·A·克诺夫,2006),33;理查德·N·卡伦特(Richard N. Current),《无人知晓的林肯》(纽约:McGraw-Hill,1963)。

9. Don E. Fehrenbacher, “Only His Stepchildren: Lincoln and the Negro,” Civil War History 20 (1974), 293–310, 293, as quoted in Richard Carwardine, Lincoln: A Life of Purpose and Power (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2006), 33; Richard N. Current, The Lincoln Nobody Knows (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1963).

10.当前,无人知晓的林肯, 19-20。

10. Current, The Lincoln Nobody Knows, 19–20.

11.观众不会直接选举任何一人,因为直到 1913 年第 17 条修正案通过之前,州立法机构才选举美国参议员。

11. The audiences would not be directly electing either man, as until the passage of the 17th amendment in 1913, state legislatures elected U.S. senators.

12.在每场辩论中,一名候选人以 60 分钟的演讲开始,其对手随后进行 90 分钟的演讲,然后原演讲者有 30 分钟的时间进行回应和结束。

12. In each of the debates, one candidate opened with a 60-minute speech, his opponent followed with a 90-minute speech, and then the original speaker had 30 minutes to respond and close.

13. James W. Loewen,《老师告诉我的谎言》(纽约:自由出版社,1995 年),153。

13. James W. Loewen, Lies My Teacher Told Me (New York: Free Press, 1995), 153.

14. Eric Foner,《自由土壤、自由劳动力、自由人:内战前共和党的意识形态》(纽约:牛津大学出版社,1995 年),263。Foner 写道:“有时“在 1850 年代,民主党政治武器库中唯一的武器似乎就是指控共和党亲黑人”,并指出密苏里州立法者弗朗西斯·P·布莱尔将其描述为道格拉斯竞选活动中“持续不断的主题”。

14. Eric Foner, Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men: The Ideology of the Republican Party Before the Civil War (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), 263. Foner wrote: “At times during the 1850’s it seemed that the only weapon in the Democrats’ political arsenal was the charge that the Republicans were pro-Negro,” and noted that Missouri legislator Francis P. Blair described it as the “incessant theme” of Douglas’s campaign.

15.同上,261。这些州是爱荷华州、印第安纳州、伊利诺伊州和俄勒冈州。

15. Ibid., 261. These states were Iowa, Indiana, Illinois, and Oregon.

16. Garry Wills,“不诚实的安倍”,《时代》杂志,1992 年 10 月 5 日,41。

16. Garry Wills, “Dishonest Abe,” Time, October 5, 1992, 41.

17.多丽丝·卡恩斯·古德温 (Doris Kearns Goodwin),《竞争对手团队:亚伯拉罕·林肯的政治天才》(纽约:西蒙和舒斯特,2005 年),8。

17. Doris Kearns Goodwin, Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2005), 8.

18.福纳,《自由土地,自由劳动力》,《自由人》, 261-262。

18. Foner, Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men, 261–262.

19. Phillip Shaw Paludan,“林肯和黑人奴隶制:我没有时间承受痛苦”,《亚伯拉罕·林肯协会杂志》(2006 年夏季),第 32 段 ( http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/jala /27.2/paludan.html

19. Phillip Shaw Paludan, “Lincoln and Negro Slavery: I Haven’t Got Time for the Pain,” Journal of the Abraham Lincoln Association (Summer 2006), paragraph 32 (http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/jala/27.2/paludan.html)

20.乔治·M·弗雷德里克森(George M. Fredrickson),《白人头脑中的黑人形象:关于非裔美国人性格和命运的辩论1817-1914》(纽约,1971),43。

20. George M. Fredrickson, The Black Image in the White Mind: The Debate on Afro-American Character and Destiny, 1817–1914 (New York, 1971), 43.

21. Paludan,“林肯和黑人奴隶制”。

21. Paludan, “Lincoln and Negro Slavery.”

22.埃里克·福纳(Eric Foner),“林肯与殖民化”,载于《我们的林肯:林肯及其世界的新视角》,编辑。埃里克·福纳(纽约:WW Norton & Co.,2008),144。

22. Eric Foner, “Lincoln and Colonization,” in Our Lincoln: New Perspectives on Lincoln and His World, ed. Eric Foner (New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 2008), 144.

23.莱隆·贝内特 (Lerone Bennett),《被迫走向荣耀:亚伯拉罕·林肯的白色梦想》(芝加哥:约翰逊出版社,2000 年)。

23. Lerone Bennett, Forced into Glory: Abraham Lincoln’s White Dream (Chicago: Johnson Publishing, 2000).

24.有关最近的例子,请参见 Foner,“林肯与殖民化”;菲利普·S·帕鲁丹(Phillip S. Paludan),《林肯解放:总统和种族政治》中的“格里利、殖民化和“黑人代表团”” ,编辑。Brian R. Dirck 和 Allen C. Guelzo(DeKalb:北伊利诺伊大学出版社,2007 年),29-46;凯文·RC·古兹曼 (Kevin RC Gutzman),“亚伯拉罕·林肯,杰斐逊主义者:殖民幻想”,载于《林肯解放:总统与种族政治》,编辑。Brian R. Dirck 和 Allen C. Guelzo(DeKalb:北伊利诺伊大学出版社,2007 年),47–72;理查德·布莱克特,“林肯与殖民”,OAH 历史杂志 21 (4) (2007),19-22。

24. For recent examples, see Foner, “Lincoln and Colonization”; Phillip S. Paludan, “Greeley, Colonization, and a “Deputation of Negroes” in Lincoln Emancipated: The President and the Politics of Race, eds. Brian R. Dirck and Allen C. Guelzo (DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 2007), 29–46; Kevin R. C. Gutzman, “Abraham Lincoln, Jeffersonian: The Colonization Chimera” in Lincoln Emancipated: The President and the Politics of Race, eds. Brian R. Dirck and Allen C. Guelzo (DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 2007), 47–72; Richard Blackett, “Lincoln and Colonization,” OAH Magazine of History 21 (4) (2007), 19–22.

25.费伦巴赫,“只有他的继子:林肯和黑人”,308。

25. Fehrenbacher, “Only His Stepchildren: Lincoln and the Negro,” 308.

26.福纳,“林肯与殖民化”。

26. Foner, “Lincoln and Colonization”.

27.参见《亚伯拉罕·林肯文集》,卷。5, 372,可在http://quod.lib.umich.edu/l/lincoln/获取。诸如“如果没有奴隶制和有色人种作为基础,战争就不可能存在”之类的言论激怒了弗雷德里克·道格拉斯等著名黑人。

27. See The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, vol. 5, 372, available at http://quod.lib.umich.edu/l/lincoln/. Statements such as “Without the institution of slavery and the colored race as a basis, the war could not have an existence” angered prominent Blacks such as Frederick Douglass.

28.亚伯拉罕·林肯,《亚伯拉罕·林肯文集》(安娜堡:密歇根大学数字图书馆制作服务中心,2001 年),第 1 卷。5, 389,可在http://quod.lib.umich.edu/l/lincoln/获取

28. Abraham Lincoln, The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Digital Library Production Services, 2001) vol. 5, 389, available at http://quod.lib.umich.edu/l/lincoln/

29. James N. Leiker,“理解安倍的困难:林肯对种族不平等与自然权利的和解”,载于《林肯解放:总统与种族政治》,编辑。Brian R. Dirck(Dekalb:北伊利诺伊大学出版社,2007 年)。

29. James N. Leiker, “The Difficulties of Understanding Abe: Lincoln’s Reconciliation of Racial Inequality and Natural Rights,” in Lincoln Emancipated: The President and The Politics of Race, ed. Brian R. Dirck (Dekalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 2007).

30. Sam Wineburg,“阅读亚伯拉罕·林肯:历史文本解释的专家/专家研究”,认知科学 22 (1998),319-346。

30. Sam Wineburg, “Reading Abraham Lincoln: An Expert/Expert Study in the Interpretation of Historical Texts,” Cognitive Science 22 (1998), 319–346.

31. Samuel S. Wineburg 和 Janice Fournier,“历史中的情境化思维”,《历史和社会科学的认知和教学过程》,编辑。M. Carretero 和 JF Voss(新泽西州希尔斯代尔:Erlbaum,1994)。

31. Samuel S. Wineburg and Janice Fournier, “Contextualized Thinking in History,” in Cognitive and Instructional Processes in History and the Social Sciences, eds. M. Carretero and J. F. Voss (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1994).

32.参见 DW Johnson 和 RT Johnson,“通过争议进行批判性思考”,教育领导力,1988 年 5 月,58-64;国家历史教育信息交换所,历史课堂上的结构化学术争议http://teachinghistory.org/teaching-materials/teaching-guides/21731

32. See D. W. Johnson and R. T. Johnson, “Critical Thinking Through Controversy,” Educational Leadership, May 1988, 58–64; National History Education Clearinghouse, Structured Academic Controversy in the History Classroom, http://teachinghistory.org/teaching-materials/teaching-guides/21731

33. D. Martin 和 S. Wineburg,“在网络上看到思维”,历史教师 41:3。(加利福尼亚州长滩:历史教育协会,2008 年)。http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/ht/41.3/martin.html

33. D. Martin and S. Wineburg, “Seeing Thinking on the Web,” The History Teacher 41:3. (Long Beach, CA: Society for History Education, 2008). http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/ht/41.3/martin.html

第4章

Chapter 4

1. Howard Zinn,《美国人民的历史》(纽约:Harper Perennial,2005 年),4;柯克帕特里克·赛尔(Kirkpatrick Sale),克里斯托弗·哥伦布与天堂的征服(纽约:Tauris Parke,2006)。

1. Howard Zinn, A People’s History of the United States (New York: Harper Perennial, 2005), 4; Kirkpatrick Sale, Christopher Columbus and the Conquest of Paradise (New York: Tauris Parke, 2006).

2. Sam Wineburg,“非自然和本质:历史思维的本质”,《历史教学》129(2007 年 12 月),6-11;Sam Wineburg 和 Jack Schneider,“颠倒布鲁姆的分类法”,教育周刊(2009 年 9 月),28;Sam Wineburg,“哥伦布日:1892 年而非 1492 年”,《洛杉矶时报》(2005 年 10 月 10 日),18。

2. Sam Wineburg, “Unnatural and Essential: The Nature of Historical Thinking,” Teaching History 129 (December 2007), 6–11; Sam Wineburg and Jack Schneider, “Inverting Bloom’s Taxonomy,” Education Week (September 2009), 28; Sam Wineburg, “Columbus Day: 1892 not 1492,” Los Angeles Times (October 10, 2005), 18.

3.温伯格,“非自然和必要”,6-11。

3. Wineburg, “Unnatural and Essential,” 6–11.

4.参见 Matthew Frye Jacobson,《不同颜色的白度:欧洲移民和种族炼金术》(剑桥:哈佛大学出版社,1999 年)。

4. See Matthew Frye Jacobson, Whiteness of a Different Color: European Immigration and the Alchemy of Race (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999).

5.北美合众国全国委员会第二条,引自卡尔·弗里蒙特·布兰德 (Carl Fremont Brand),“印第安纳州无知党的历史”,印第安纳州历史杂志 18 (1922),73。

5. Article II of the National Council of the United States of North America, quoted in Carl Fremont Brand, “The History of the Know Nothing Party in Indiana,” Indiana Magazine of History 18 (1922), 73.

6. “克里斯托弗·哥伦布——新大陆的发现者”,康涅狄格天主教 25(1878 年 5 月),4。

6. “Christopher Columbus—Discoverer of the New World,” Connecticut Catholic 25 (May 1878), 4.

7. Christopher J. Kauffman,《信仰与兄弟情谊:哥伦布骑士团的历史,1882-1982》(纽约:Harper and Row,1982),16。

7. Christopher J. Kauffman, Faith and Fraternalism: The History of the Knights of Columbus, 1882–1982 (New York: Harper and Row, 1982), 16.

8. Thomas J. Schlereth,“哥伦比亚、哥伦布和哥伦比亚主义”,《美国历史杂志》79(1992 年 12 月),937-968。

8. Thomas J. Schlereth, “Columbia, Columbus, and Columbianism,” Journal of American History 79 (December 1992), 937–968.

9.参见“The Tweed Ring in Charge”,第 9 章,载于 Diane Ravitch,The Great School Wars:New York City 1805-1973(纽约:Basic Books,1974),92-99。

9. See “The Tweed Ring in Charge,” Chapter 9, in Diane Ravitch, The Great School Wars: New York City 1805–1973 (New York: Basic Books, 1974), 92–99.

第5章

Chapter 5

1.如需完整信件,请访问http://memory.loc.gov/learn/lessons/99/edison/images/mrs2.gif

1. For the full letter, go to http://memory.loc.gov/learn/lessons/99/edison/images/mrs2.gif

2. David Nye,《电气化美国:新技术的社会意义,1880-1940》(马萨诸塞州剑桥:麻省理工学院出版社,1990 年),299。

2. David Nye, Electrifying America: Social Meanings of a New Technology, 1880–1940 (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1990), 299.

3. D. Clayton Brown,《美国农村电力:为 REA 而战》(康涅狄格州韦斯特波特:格林伍德出版社,1980 年),xv。

3. D. Clayton Brown, Electricity for Rural America: The Fight for the REA (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1980), xv.

4.布朗,《美国农村电力》, xvi。

4. Brown, Electricity for Rural America, xvi.

5.有关这方面的更多信息,请参阅 Ruth Schwartz Cowen 在《为母亲做更多的工作:从平炉到微波炉的家用技术的讽刺》(纽约:基础书籍,1983 年)中的“工作流程”概念,11-12。

5. For more on this, see Ruth Schwartz Cowen’s notion of a “work process” in More Work for Mother: The Ironies of Household Technology from the Open Hearth to the Microwave (New York: Basic Books, 1983), 11–12.

6. Susan Strasser,《从未完成:美国家务史》(纽约:Henry Holt,1982),105。

6. Susan Strasser, Never Done: A History of American Housework (New York: Henry Holt, 1982), 105.

7.布朗,《美国农村电力》, xiii。

7. Brown, Electricity for Rural America, xiii.

8.同上,十四。

8. Ibid., xiv.

9.罗伯特·卡罗,《林登·约翰逊的岁月:权力之路》(纽约:阿尔弗雷德·A·克诺普夫,1982 年),504-509。

9. Robert Caro, The Years of Lyndon Johnson: The Path to Power (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1982), 504–509.

10.奈,《电气化美国》, 303。

10. Nye, Electrifying America, 303.

11.同上,287。

11. Ibid., 287.

12.布朗,《美国农村电力》, 75。

12. Brown, Electricity for Rural America, 75.

13.同上,112。

13. Ibid., 112.

14.斯特拉瑟,《从未完成》, 81。

14. Strasser, Never Done, 81.

15.考恩,《为母亲做更多工作》, 173。

15. Cowen, More Work for Mother, 173.

16.奈,《电气化美国》, 267。

16. Nye, Electrifying America, 267.

17.同上,24。

17. Ibid., 24.

18.在另一个例子中,斯特拉瑟(Never Done, 279)声称,到 1980 年,“几乎一半”的美国家庭拥有洗碗机——距离拉斯罗普夫人写下她的洗碗机已经 59 年了!

18. In another example, Strasser (Never Done, 279) claims that “almost half” of American households had a dishwasher by 1980—59 years after Mrs. Lathrop wrote about hers!

19.考恩,《为母亲做更多工作》, 159。

19. Cowen, More Work for Mother, 159.

20.同上。

20. Ibid.

21.添加斜体。如需完整信件,请访问http://memory.loc.gov/learn/lessons/99/edison/images/mrs2.gif

21. Italics added. For the full letter, go to http://memory.loc.gov/learn/lessons/99/edison/images/mrs2.gif

22.考恩,《为母亲做更多工作》, 174。

22. Cowen, More Work for Mother, 174.

23.同上,178。

23. Ibid., 178.

24. Patricia Albjerg Graham,“扩张与排斥:美国高等教育中女性的历史”,载于《美国女性历史:教育》,编辑。南希·科特,(纽约:KG Saur,1992),219。

24. Patricia Albjerg Graham, “Expansion and Exclusion: A History of Women in American Higher Education,” in History of Women in the United States: Education, ed. Nancy Cott, (New York: K. G. Saur, 1992), 219.

25.同上。

25. Ibid.

26.同上。

26. Ibid.

27.同上,223。

27. Ibid., 223.

28.同上,225。有关这些统计数据的另一篇文章,请参见 Pamela Roby,“Women and American高等教育”,Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 404 (127)(1972 年 11 月),118-139。

28. Ibid., 225. For another article on these statistics, see Pamela Roby, “Women and American Higher Education,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 404 (127) (November 1972), 118–139.

29.芭芭拉·米勒·所罗门 (Barbara Miller Solomon),《与受过教育的女性在一起:美国女性与高等教育的历史》(康涅狄格州纽黑文:耶鲁大学出版社,1985 年),121。

29. Barbara Miller Solomon, In the Company of Educated Women: A History of Women and Higher Education in America (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1985), 121.

30. W. Elliot Brownlee,“家庭价值观、妇女工作和经济增长,1800-1930 年”,《美国妇女史:家庭意识形态和家庭工作》,第一部分,205。

30. W. Elliot Brownlee, “Household Values, Women’s Work, and Economic Growth, 1800–1930,” History of Women in the United States: Domestic Ideology and Domestic Work, Part I, 205.

31.布朗,《美国农村电力》, 9。

31. Brown, Electricity for Rural America, 9.

32.同上,116-117。

32. Ibid., 116–117.

33.斯特拉瑟,《从未完成》, 268。

33. Strasser, Never Done, 268.

34.有关这方面的更多信息,请参阅 Cowen,《为母亲做更多的工作》。

34. For more on this, see Cowen, More Work for Mother.

35.考恩,《为母亲做更多工作》, 99。

35. Cowen, More Work for Mother, 99.

36.同上,174。

36. Ibid., 174.

37.同上,178。

37. Ibid., 178.

38.同上。

38. Ibid.

39.参见 Cowen,《为母亲做更多的工作》,第 3 章,了解她关于“家务劳动的发明”的论点。

39. See Cowen, More Work for Mother, Chapter 3 for her argument about “the invention of housework.”

第6章

Chapter 6

1.可以说斯坦贝克的小说是一部真实的作品,但关键是虚构故事和历史叙事的“规则”不同。这并不是说小说中没有真相,而是小说允许虚构的人物,并偏离证据来讲述真相。或者,正如戴维森和莱特尔所说,“与历史学家不同,他[斯坦贝克]不受严格的证据和解释规则的约束,只受人类状况的真实表达的约束。” 参见 James W. Davidson 和 Mark H. Lytle,《事后:历史侦查的艺术》(波士顿:麦格劳-希尔高等教育,1999 年),260。

1. An argument can be made that Steinbeck’s novel is a work of truth, but the point is that the “rules” of fictional stories and historical narratives differ. This is not to argue that in fiction, there isn’t truth, but rather that fiction allows invented characters, and straying from the evidence to tell that truth. Or, as Davidson and Lytle state, “Unlike a historian, he [Steinbeck] was not bound by strict rules of evidence and explanation, only by the true expression of the human condition.” See James W. Davidson & Mark H. Lytle, After the Fact: The Art of Historical Detection (Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 1999), 260.

2. Donald Worster,《沙尘暴:1930 年代的南部平原》(纽约:牛津大学出版社,1979 年),29。

2. Donald Worster, Dust Bowl: The Southern Plains in the 1930s (New York: Oxford University Press, 1979), 29.

3. Alvin O. Turner, ed., Letters from the Dust Bowl (作者 Caroline Henderson) (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2001), 10. 1819 年,探险家史蒂芬·朗 (Stephen Long) 将其称为内战前和内战后,地图会将俄克拉荷马州狭长地带识别为后者。

3. Alvin O. Turner, ed., Letters from the Dust Bowl (author Caroline Henderson) (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2001), 10. In 1819, explorer Stephen Long would call it the former and after the Civil War, maps would identify the Oklahoma Panhandle as the latter.

4.历史学家对于沙尘暴的开始和结束年份的准确说法存在分歧。但他们一致认为,1933 年之后风暴更加严重,而 1935 年至 1937 年是最严重的年份。

4. Historians differ on exactly what years they call the beginning and the end of the Dust Bowl. But they agree that the storms worsened after 1933 and that 1935–1937 were the worst years.

5. R. Douglas Hurt,《沙尘暴:农业和社会史》(芝加哥:Nelson-Hall,1981 年),3。

5. R. Douglas Hurt, The Dust Bowl: An Agricultural and Social History (Chicago: Nelson-Hall, 1981), 3.

6.特纳,《尘暴来信》, 19;最糟糕的是,灰尘碗, 15。

6. Turner, Letters from the Dust Bowl, 19; Worster, Dust Bowl, 15.

7. “巨大的尘埃云,吹过 1,500 英里,昏暗的城市 5 小时”,《纽约时报》,1934 年 5 月 12 日,1。

7. “Huge Dust Cloud, Blown 1,500 Miles, Dims City 5 Hours,” New York Times, May 12, 1934, 1.

8.最糟糕的,灰尘碗, 14。

8. Worster, Dust Bowl, 14.

9. Pauline W. Grey,“1935 年 4 月 14 日的黑色星期日”,《米德县先锋故事》,1950 年,25,www.kansasmemory.org/item /211072

9. Pauline W. Grey, “The Black Sunday of April 14, 1935,” Pioneer Stories of Meade County, 1950, 25, www.kansasmemory.org/item/211072

10.同上,27。随之而来的是格雷“令人满意的平安”,当天早些时候她努力修补房子里的所有裂缝,所以她可以“幸福地死去!”

10. Ibid., 27. Accompanying this was Grey’s “satisfying peace” that her efforts earlier that day to patch up all the cracks in her house were holding, so she could have “died happily!”

11.同上,26。

11. Ibid., 26.

12.有关迁移率和模式的详细描述,请参阅 Worster,Dust Bowl,第 3 章“Okies 和 Exodusters”。

12. See Worster, Dust Bowl, Chapter 3, “Okies and Exodusters,” for a detailed rendering of migration rates and patterns.

13.《伤害》,《沙尘暴》, 91-92。有关以前的历史在这一点上有何不同的讨论,请参阅 Harry C. McDean 的“Dust Bowl Historiography”,《Americans View Their Dust Bowl Experience》,编辑。JR Wunder、F. Kaye 和 V. Carstensen(博尔德:科罗拉多大学出版社,1999 年),366-384。

13. Hurt, The Dust Bowl, 91–92. For a discussion of how previous histories differed on this point, see Harry C. McDean, “Dust Bowl Historiography,” in Americans View Their Dust Bowl Experience, eds. J. R. Wunder, F. Kaye, and V. Carstensen (Boulder: University Press of Colorado, 1999), 366–384.

14. Timothy Egan,《最艰难的时光:美国大沙尘暴幸存者不为人知的故事》(波士顿:Houghton Mifflin Company,2006 年),192;伤害,尘埃,53-54。

14. Timothy Egan, The Worst Hard Time: The Untold Story of Those Who Survived The Great American Dust Bowl (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2006), 192; Hurt, The Dust Bowl, 53–54.

15.麦克迪恩,“尘暴史学”,369。

15. McDean, “Dust Bowl Historiography,” 369.

16.最差,沙尘暴, 66。

16. Worster, Dust Bowl, 66.

17.同上,77。

17. Ibid., 77.

18.同上,83。

18. Ibid., 83.

19.同上,88;伤害,尘暴, 21。

19. Ibid., 88; Hurt, The Dust Bowl, 21.

20.有关这些几乎绝迹的草皮房子的照片,请参阅国会图书馆的馆藏,网址为:http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/award97/ndfahtml/hult_sod.html 。

20. See the Library of Congress collection at http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/award97/ndfahtml/hult_sod.html for pictures of these almost extinct sod houses.

21.最糟糕,灰尘碗, 94。

21. Worster, Dust Bowl, 94.

22.同上,97。

22. Ibid., 97.

23.《伤害》,《尘暴》, 15。

23. Hurt, The Dust Bowl, 15.

24.参见 Paul Bonnifield,《沙尘暴:男人、污垢和抑郁》(阿尔伯克基:新墨西哥大学出版社,1979 年)。

24. See Paul Bonnifield, The Dust Bowl: Men, Dirt, and Depression (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1979).

25.参见 James C. Malin,《北美草原:历史序言》(Lawrence, KS:作者,1961 年)。

25. See James C. Malin, The Grassland of North America: Prolegomena to Its History (Lawrence, KS: Author, 1961).

26.麦克迪恩,“尘暴史学”。

26. McDean, “Dust Bowl Historiography.”

27.威廉·克罗农 (William Cronon),“故事之地:自然、历史和叙事”,《美国历史杂志》78 (4)(1992) 1347–1376。

27. William Cronon, “A Place for Stories: Nature, History, and Narrative,” The Journal of American History 78(4)(1992) 1347–1376.

28.有关“开放教科书”方法以及如何使用教科书的更多信息,请参阅关于古巴导弹危机的第 8 章。另请参阅以下内容:Sam Wineburg,“打开教科书并为学生提供第二个声音”,《教育周刊》,2007 年 6 月 5 日,36-37;黛西·马丁,“通过‘打开教科书’从讲座到教训”,美国历史学家组织通讯,2008 年 11 月,9;黛西·马丁和昌西·蒙特-萨诺,“探究、争议和模棱两可的文本:学习历史思维教学”,载于《历史教育 101:教师准备的过去、现在和未来》,编辑。W. Warren 和 D. Cantu(北卡罗来纳州夏洛特:信息时代出版,2007 年),167–186。另请参阅以下位置的许多资源http://sheg.stanford.edu

28. For more on the “Opening Up the Textbook” approach and how to work with textbooks, see Chapter 8 on the Cuban Missile Crisis. Also see the following: Sam Wineburg, “Opening Up the Textbook and Offering Students a Second Voice,” Education Week, June 5, 2007, 36–37; Daisy Martin, “From Lecture to Lesson Through ‘Opening Up the Textbook,’” Organization of American Historians Newsletter, November 2008, 9; Daisy Martin and Chauncey Monte-Sano, “Inquiry, Controversy, and Ambiguous Texts: Learning to Teach for Historical Thinking,” in History Education 101: The Past, Present, and Future of Teacher Preparation, eds. W. Warren & D. Cantu (Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, 2007), 167–186. See as well the many resources at http://sheg.stanford.edu

29. “支持、竞争或扩展”的语言来自罗伯特·贝恩 (Robert B. Bain),“‘他们认为世界是平的?’ 在高中历史教学中应用人们如何学习的原则”, 《学生如何在课堂上学习历史、数学和科学》,编辑。M. Suzanne Donovan 和 John Branford(华盛顿特区:国家学院出版社,2005 年),179-213。

29. The language of “support, contest or extend” comes from Robert B. Bain, “‘They Thought the World Was Flat?’ Applying the Principles of How People Learn in Teaching High School History,” in How Students Learn History, Mathematics, and Science in the Classroom, eds. M. Suzanne Donovan and John Branford (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 2005), 179–213.

30. HE Dregne,“干旱地区的荒漠化”,荒漠化物理学,编辑。F. El-Baz 和 MHA Hassan(荷兰多德雷赫特:Martinus Nijhoff),4-34。

30. H. E. Dregne, “Desertification of Arid Lands,” in Physics of Desertification, eds. F. El-Baz and M. H. A. Hassan (Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff), 4–34.

第7章

Chapter 7

1. Douglas Brinkley,Rosa Parks:A Life(纽约:Penguin Books,2000),106。对于司机实际所说的话有多种说法,从“让我拥有那些前座...... 你们最好放轻松点,让我有那些座位”到“黑鬼们退后”。罗莎·帕克斯 (Rosa Parks) 与吉姆·哈斯金斯 (Jim Haskins) 的《我的故事》(纽约:Puffin Books,1992 年),珍妮特·史蒂文森 (Janet Stevenson),“罗莎·帕克斯不会让步”,美国遗产 XXIII (2)(1972 年 2 月),可在http://www.americanheritage获取.com/articles/magazine/ah/1972/2/1972_2_56.shtml

1. Douglas Brinkley, Rosa Parks: A Life (New York: Penguin Books, 2000), 106. There are a variety of accounts of what the driver actually said, ranging from “Let me have those front seats…. Y’all better make it light on yourselves and let me have those seats” to “Niggers move back.” My Story by Rosa Parks with Jim Haskins (New York: Puffin Books, 1992) in Janet Stevenson, “Rosa Parks Wouldn’t Budge,” American Heritage XXIII (2) (February 1972), available at http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1972/2/1972_2_56.shtml

2.史蒂文森,“罗莎·帕克斯不会让步。”

2. Stevenson, “Rosa Parks Wouldn’t Budge.”

3. Sam Wineburg,“再见,哥伦布”,史密森尼杂志 39 (2) (2008),98-104。

3. Sam Wineburg, “Goodbye, Columbus,” Smithsonian Magazine 39(2) (2008), 98–104.

4. Sam Wineburg 和 Chauncey Monte-Sano,“著名美国人:不断变化的美国英雄万神殿”,《美国历史杂志》93 (2) (2008),1186-1202。

4. Sam Wineburg and Chauncey Monte-Sano, “Famous Americans: The Changing Pantheon of American Heroes,” Journal of American History 93(2) (2008), 1186–1202.

5.美国商务部气象局,当地气候数据及比较数据,阿拉巴马州蒙哥马利,1955 年(可通过 NOAA 卫星和信息服务获取,http://www.nesdis.noaa.gov/)。

5. U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Bureau, Local Climatological Data, with Comparative Data, Montgomery, Alabama, 1955 (available through NOAA Satellite and Information Service, http://www.nesdis.noaa.gov/).

6.罗莎·帕克斯 (Rosa Parks),西德尼·罗杰斯 (Sidney Rogers) 采访,《罗莎·帕克斯:开始抵制巴士》,太平洋广播电台采访,1956 年夏季。

6. Rosa Parks, interview by Sidney Rogers, Rosa Parks: Beginning the Bus Boycott, Pacific Radio Service Interview, Summer 1956.

7.例如,参见乔伊·哈基姆 (Joy Hakim) 在《美国历史:1945-2001 年所有人》(纽约:牛津大学出版社,1993 年)中的其他优秀章节,第 78 页:“但是在 1955 年 12 月第一天的晚上帕克斯夫人大多只是累了。她已经投入了一整天的工作。她感觉不舒服,脖子和背部都疼。她坐上公交车回家了。”

7. See, for example, Joy Hakim’s otherwise excellent chapter in A History of US: All the People 1945–2001 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 78: “But on the evening of the first day of December in 1955, Mrs. Parks was mostly just plain tired. She had put in a full day at her job. She didn’t feel well, and her neck and back hurt. She got on a bus and headed home.”

8. Rosa Parks,引自 Alden D. Morris,《民权运动的起源:黑人社区组织变革》(纽约:自由出版社,1984 年),51。

8. Rosa Parks, cited in Alden D. Morris, The Origins of the Civil Rights Movement: Black Communities Organizing for Change (New York: Free Press, 1984), 51.

9.同上。

9. Ibid.

10. “Parks, Rosa Lee”,《世界图书百科全书》(芝加哥:世界图书公司,1989 年)。

10. “Parks, Rosa Lee,” The World Book Encyclopedia (Chicago: World Book Inc., 1989).

11. Gerald Danzer、J. Jorge Klor de Alva、Larry S. Krieger、Louis Wilson 和 Nancy Woloch,《美国人》(伊利诺伊州埃文斯顿:McDougal Littell,2003 年),910。

11. Gerald Danzer, J. Jorge Klor de Alva, Larry S. Krieger, Louis Wilson, and Nancy Woloch, The Americans (Evanston, IL: McDougal Littell, 2003), 910.

12. Joyce Appleby、Alan Brinkley 和 James McPherson,《美国之旅》(芝加哥:Glencoe/McGraw-Hill,2003 年),841。

12. Joyce Appleby, Alan Brinkley, and James McPherson, The American Journey (Chicago: Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, 2003), 841.

13. Winthrop D. Jordan、Miriam Greenblatt 和 John S. Bowes,《美国人:自由人民的历史》(伊利诺伊州埃文斯顿:McDougal Littell,1985 年),721。

13. Winthrop D. Jordan, Miriam Greenblatt, and John S. Bowes, The Americans: History of a Free People (Evanston, IL: McDougal Littell, 1985), 721.

14.《蒙哥马利市法典》,第 6 章,第 10-11 节。

14. Montgomery City Code, Chapter 6, Sections 10–11.

15.布林克利,罗莎·帕克斯:一生, 58, 106。

15. Brinkley, Rosa Parks: A Life, 58, 106.

16.同上,94-97。

16. Ibid., 94–97.

17.参见Elizabeth Loftus 和Katherine Ketcham,《辩方证人:被告、目击者和审判记忆的专家》(纽约:St. Martin's Griffin,1992 年)。

17. See Elizabeth Loftus and Katherine Ketcham, Witness for the Defense: The Accused, the Eyewitness and the Expert Who Puts Memory on Trial (New York: St. Martin’s Griffin, 1992).

18.罗莎·帕克斯和吉姆·哈斯金斯,《罗莎·帕克斯:我的故事》(纽约:Dial Books,1992 年),113。

18. Rosa Parks with Jim Haskins, Rosa Parks: My Story (New York: Dial Books, 1992), 113.

19.罗莎·帕克斯和吉姆·哈斯金斯,《我是罗莎·帕克斯》(纽约:Dial Books,1997 年),8。

19. Rosa Parks with Jim Haskins, I Am Rosa Parks (New York: Dial Books, 1997), 8.

20.罗杰斯,罗莎·帕克斯:开始抵制公交车

20. Rogers, Rosa Parks: Beginning the Bus Boycott.

21.蒙哥马利市法典,第 6 章,第 10-11 节。

21. Montgomery City Code, Chapter 6, Sections 10–11.

22.蒙哥马利城市代码,从http://www.blackpast.org/?q=primary/browder-v-gayle-1956下载

22. Montgomery City Code, downloaded from http://www.blackpast.org/?q=primary/browder-v-gayle-1956

23. 1940 年《阿拉巴马州法典》第 48 章第 301(31a, b, c) 条(经修订),网址:http://faculty.washington.edu/documents_us/browderv.gayle.htm

23. Title 48, § 301(31a, b, c), Code of Alabama of 1940, as amended, at http://faculty.washington.edu/documents_us/browderv.gayle.htm

24. Rosa Parks 诉蒙哥马利市上诉法院案情摘要,1956 年 3 月 28 日向阿拉巴马州上诉法院提交。

24. Rosa Parks v. City of Montgomery, appellate court brief, filed March 28, 1956, Alabama Court of Appeals.

25.罗杰斯,罗莎·帕克斯:开始抵制公交车

25. Rogers, Rosa Parks: Beginning the Bus Boycott.

26.同上,4:00–4:33。

26. Ibid., 4:00–4:33.

27.罗莎·帕克斯 (Rosa Parks),接受林恩·尼尔里 (Lynn Neary) 采访,《民权偶像罗莎·帕克斯去世》,国家公共广播电台,网址:http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php ?storyId=4973548

27. Rosa Parks, interviewed by Lynn Neary, Civil Rights Icon Rosa Parks Dies, National Public Radio, at http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4973548

28.斯图尔特·伯恩斯,《自由的黎明:蒙哥马利巴士抵制》(教堂山:北卡罗来纳大学出版社,1997 年),34。

28. Stewart Burns, Daybreak of Freedom: The Montgomery Bus Boycott (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1997), 34.

29. 亚特兰大宪法,1900 年 8 月 16 日,引自 Burns,34,n。15.

29. Atlanta Constitution, August 16, 1900, cited in Burns, 34, n. 15.

30. 亚特兰大宪法,1900 年 9 月 20 日,引自 August Meier 和 Elliot Rudwick,“The Boycott Movement Against Jim Crow Streetcars in the South, 1900–1906”,Journal of American History(1969 年 3 月),756–775。

30. Atlanta Constitution, September 20, 1900, cited in August Meier and Elliot Rudwick, “The Boycott Movement Against Jim Crow Streetcars in the South, 1900–1906,” Journal of American History (March 1969), 756–775.

31.乔·安·吉布森·罗宾逊 (Jo Ann Gibson Robinson),《蒙哥马利巴士抵制运动及其发起者:乔·安·吉布森·罗宾逊回忆录》(诺克斯维尔:田纳西大学出版社,1987 年)。

31. Jo Ann Gibson Robinson, The Montgomery Bus Boycott and the Women Who Started It: The Memoir of Jo Ann Gibson Robinson (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1987).

32. ER Shipp,“Rosa Parks,92 岁,民权运动的奠基人去世”,《纽约时报》,2005 年 10 月 25 日,http: //www.nytimes.com/2005/10/25/national/ 25parks.html?adxnnl=1&pagewanted=2

32. E. R. Shipp, “Rosa Parks, 92, Founding Symbol of Civil Rights Movement, Dies,” The New York Times, October 25, 2005, at http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/25/national/25parks.html?adxnnl=1&pagewanted=2

33. Ralph Abernathy,“社会运动的自然史”(硕士论文,佐治亚州亚特兰大,1958 年),网址:http://historicalthinkingmatters.org/rosaparks/1/sources/22/

33. Ralph Abernathy, “The Natural History of a Social Movement” (Master’s thesis, Atlanta, Georgia, 1958), at http://historicalthinkingmatters.org/rosaparks/1/sources/22/

34.同上。

34. Ibid.

35. Shipp,“罗莎·帕克斯,92 岁,民权运动的奠基人,去世。

35. Shipp, “Rosa Parks, 92, Founding Symbol of Civil Rights Movement, Dies.

36.参见注释 2,“社会革命”,摘自《用文件教学:勇敢的行动》、《罗莎·帕克斯的逮捕记录》,国家档案馆网站,“教育者和学生”,网址: http: //www.archives.gov/教育/课程/罗莎帕克斯/

36. See Note 2, “Social Revolution,” from Teaching with Documents: An Act of Courage, the Arrest Records of Rosa Parks, the National Archives website, “Educators and Students,” at http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/rosa-parks/

37. 历史思维问题,教师资源,学生作业样本(学生 B),网址:http://historicalthinkingmatters.org/rosaparks/1/studentwork/paper2/

37. Historical Thinking Matters, Resources for Teachers, sample student work (Student B) at http://historicalthinkingmatters.org/rosaparks/1/studentwork/paper2/

第8章

Chapter 8

1.乔治·塔姆斯 (George Tames),“男人与政策”,《纽约时报》,1962 年 12 月 10 日,11。

1. George Tames, “Men and Policy,” The New York Times, December 10, 1962, 11.

2. Ralph Volney Harlow 和 Hermon N. Noyes,《美国故事》(纽约:Holt、Rinehart 和 Winston,1964 年),793。

2. Ralph Volney Harlow and Hermon N. Noyes, Story of America (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1964), 793.

3. Richard N. Current、Alexander DeConde 和 Harris L. Dante,《美国历史》(亚特兰大:Scott、Foresman and Co.,1967 年),751。

3. Richard N. Current, Alexander DeConde, and Harris L. Dante, United States History (Atlanta: Scott, Foresman and Co., 1967), 751.

4. Richard C. Wade、Howard B. Wilder 和 Louise C. Wade,《美国历史》(波士顿:Houghton Mifflin Company,1966 年),827。

4. Richard C. Wade, Howard B. Wilder, and Louise C. Wade, A History of the United States (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1966), 827.

5.罗伯特·肯尼迪,《十三天:古巴导弹危机回忆录》(纽约:新美国图书馆,1969 年),107-109。

5. Robert F. Kennedy, Thirteen Days: A Memoir of the Cuban Missile Crisis (New York: New American Library, 1969), 107–109.

6.罗伯特·肯尼迪,“司法部长给国务卿的备忘录”,司法部长办公室,华盛顿特区,1962 年 10 月 30 日。

6. Robert Kennedy, “Memorandum for the Secretary of State from the Attorney General,” Office of the Attorney General, Washington, D.C., October 30, 1962.

7.尼基塔·赫鲁晓夫,《赫鲁晓夫回忆:最后的遗嘱》,译,编辑。斯特罗布·塔尔博特(波士顿:利特尔·布朗,1974 年),512。

7. Nikita Khrushchev, Khrushchev Remembers: The Last Testament, trans., ed. Strobe Talbott (Boston: Little, Brown, 1974), 512.

8. Henry N. Drewry 和 Thomas H. O'Connor,《美国》(纽约:Glencoe,1995 年),648。

8. Henry N. Drewry and Thomas H. O’Connor, America Is (New York: Glencoe, 1995), 648.

9. Edward L. Ayers 等人,《美国国歌》(德克萨斯州奥斯汀:Holt、Rinehart 和 Winston,2007 年),885。

9. Edward L. Ayers et al., The American Anthem (Austin, TX: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 2007), 885.

10. Sam Wineburg,“打开教科书并为学生提供第二个声音”,《教育周刊》,2007 年 6 月 5 日,3, 37;黛西·马丁,“通过‘打开教科书’从讲座到教训”,美国历史学家组织通讯,2008 年 11 月,9;黛西·马丁和昌西·蒙特-萨诺,“探究、争议和模棱两可的文本:学习历史思维教学”,载于《历史教育 101:教师准备的过去、现在和未来》,编辑。W. Warren 和 D. Cantu(北卡罗来纳州夏洛特:信息时代出版,2007 年),167–186。

10. Sam Wineburg, “Opening Up the Textbook and Offering Students a Second Voice,” Education Week, June 5, 2007, 3, 37; Daisy Martin, “From Lecture to Lesson Through ‘Opening Up the Textbook,’” Organization of American Historians Newsletter, November 2008, 9; Daisy Martin and Chauncey Monte-Sano, “Inquiry, Controversy, and Ambiguous Texts: Learning to Teach for Historical Thinking,” in History Education 101: The Past, Present, and Future of Teacher Preparation, ed. W. Warren and D. Cantu (Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, 2007), 167–186.

11.肯尼迪,“司法部长给国务卿的备忘录”。

11. Kennedy, “Memorandum for the Secretary of State from the Attorney General.”

12. Anatoly Dobrynin,来自俄罗斯外交部档案,翻译自 NHK [日本电视台] 提供的副本,载于 Richard Ned Lebow 和 Janice Gross Stein,《我们都输掉了冷战》新泽西州普林斯顿:普林斯顿大学出版社,1994 年),附录,523-526,略有修订。http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/621027%20Dobrynin%20Cable%20to%20USSR.pdf

12. Anatoly Dobrynin, from Russian Foreign Ministry archives, translation from copy provided by NHK [Japanese TV station], in Richard Ned Lebow and Janice Gross Stein, We All Lost the Cold War (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994), Appendix, 523–526, with minor revisions. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/621027%20Dobrynin%20Cable%20to%20USSR.pdf

13.托马斯·布兰顿 (Thomas Blanton),“边缘政策年鉴”,《威尔逊季刊》,1997 年夏季,90-93。

13. Thomas Blanton, “Annals of Brinkmanship,” The Wilson Quarterly, Summer 1997, 90–93.

14.同上,91。

14. Ibid., 91.

15. McGeorge Bundy,《危险与生存:前五十年关于原子弹的选择》(纽约:兰登书屋,1987 年),432-436。

15. McGeorge Bundy, Danger and Survival: Choices About the Bomb in the First Fifty Years (New York: Random House, 1987), 432–436.

16.阿纳托利·多勃雷宁(Anatoly Dobrynin),《机密:莫斯科驻美国六位冷战总统的大使(1962-1986)》(纽约:泰晤士报出版社,1995),90。

16. Anatoly Dobrynin, In Confidence: Moscow’s Ambassador to America’s Six Cold War Presidents (1962–1986) (New York: Times Books, 1995), 90.

17.大卫·塞尔夫[编剧],《十三天》。DVD。由罗杰·唐纳森执导。新线电影院,2001年。

17. David Self [Screenwriter], Thirteen Days. DVD. Directed by Roger Donaldson. New Line Cinema, 2001.

18. Philip Brenner,《翻转历史》,乔治华盛顿大学国家安全档案馆,网址:http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/brenner.htm#2

18. Philip Brenner, “Turning History on Its Head,” the National Security Archive, George Washington University, at http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/brenner.htm#2

19.例如,参见 Graham Allison 和 Philip Zelikow,《决策的本质》,第二版。(纽约:朗文,1999);James G. Blight 和 David A. Welch,《濒临边缘:美国和苏联重新审视古巴导弹危机》(纽约:Hill 和 Wang,1989)。

19. See, for instance, Graham Allison and Philip Zelikow, Essence of Decision, 2nd ed. (New York: Longman, 1999); James G. Blight and David A. Welch, On the Brink: Americans and Soviets Reexamine the Cuban Missile Crisis (New York: Hill and Wang, 1989).

20.布伦纳,“颠覆历史”。

20. Brenner, “Turning History on Its Head.”

21.谢尔盖·赫鲁晓夫、尼基塔·赫鲁晓夫和超级大国的创建(大学公园:宾夕法尼亚州立大学出版社,2000 年),641。

21. Sergei N. Khrushchev, Nikita Khrushchev and the Creation of a Superpower (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2000), 641.

22.布兰顿,《边缘政策年鉴》,93。

22. Blanton, “Annals of Brinkmanship,” 93.

23.巴顿·伯恩斯坦(Barton Bernstein),“重新考虑导弹危机”,《古巴导弹危机重访》,编辑。JA Nathan(纽约:圣马丁,1992),106。

23. Barton Bernstein, “Reconsidering the Missile Crisis,” in The Cuban Missile Crisis Revisited, ed. J. A. Nathan (New York: St. Martin’s, 1992), 106.

指数

Index

本索引中的页面参考对应于本书的印刷版。请使用电子阅读器的搜索功能查找此处列出的主题和术语。

The page references in this index correspond to the print edition of this book. Please use the search function of your e-reader to locate the topics and terms listed herein.

 

 

拉尔夫·阿伯内西,108–109、112、118、150 n。33

Abernathy, Ralph, 108–109, 112, 118, 150 n. 33

亚伯拉罕·林肯历史数字化项目,48

Abraham Lincoln Historical Digitization Project, 48

亨利·亚当斯,2, 9, 145 n。7

Adams, Henry, 2, 9, 145 n. 7

约翰·亚当斯 2

Adams, John, 2

非洲裔美国人。请参阅上下文单元中的林肯;罗莎·帕克斯/蒙哥马利巴士抵制小组

African Americans. See Lincoln in Context unit; Rosa Parks/Montgomery Bus Boycott unit

农业调整

Agricultural Adjustment

行政管理(AAA),87

Administration (AAA), 87

教育联盟,83

Alliance for Education, 83

艾利森,格雷厄姆,150 n。19

Allison, Graham, 150 n. 19

艾林,布鲁斯·J.,136

Allyn, Bruce J., 136

亚马逊网站, 3

Amazon.com, 3

美国古物学会,83

American Antiquarian Society, 83

约翰·史密斯船长的美国梦(勒梅),2

American Dream of Captain John Smith, The (Lemay), 2

美国历史协会,141

American Historical Association, 141

美国革命。参见列克星敦格林单位

American Revolution. See Lexington Green unit

“美国恒河”(纳斯特漫画),54, 59, 62–64

“American River Ganges, The” (Nast cartoon), 54, 59, 62–64

安妮女王,2、4、10

Anne, Queen, 2, 4, 10

安纳伯格媒体,48

Annenberg Media, 48

乔伊斯·阿普尔比,149 n。12

Appleby, Joyce, 149 n. 12

阿加尔,塞缪尔,4

Argall, Samuel, 4

弗吉尼亚古物保护协会,16

Association for the Preservation of Virginia’s Antiquities, 16

易三仓学院,83

Assumption College, 83

阿瓦隆计划,64, 142

Avalon Project, The, 64, 142

艾尔斯,爱德华 L.,150 n。9

Ayers, Edward L., 150 n. 9

贝恩,罗伯特 B.,149 n。29

Bain, Robert B., 149 n. 29

弗吉尼亚州詹姆斯敦的波卡汉塔斯洗礼(查普曼绘画),2-3

Baptism of Pocahantas at Jamestown, Virginia (Chapman painting), 2–3

菲利普·L·巴伯 (Barbour),2–4、8、11、145 n。5, 145 n. 5, 145 10

Barbour, Philip L., 2–4, 8, 11, 145 n. 5, 145 n. 10

约翰·巴克,18-19、24、30、146 n。7

Barker, John, 18–19, 24, 30, 146 n. 7

基础、54、61

B.A.S.I.C., 54, 61

巴斯勒,罗伊·P.,48

Basler, Roy P., 48

列克星敦之战。参见列克星敦格林单位

Battle of Lexington. See Lexington Green unit

列克星敦之战(杜立特蚀刻),17–18、20–21、23

Battle of Lexington, The (Doolittle etching), 17–18, 20–21, 23

猪湾惨败,125、129、141

Bay of Pigs fiasco, 125, 129, 141

凯瑟琳·比彻,66 岁

Beecher, Catherine, 66

莱曼·比彻,51 岁

Beecher, Lyman, 51

菲利普·贝尔,xii,145 n。6

Bell, Philip, xii, 145 n. 6

弗朗西斯·贝拉米,52 岁

Bellamy, Francis, 52

贝内特,莱罗内,32, 36, 146 n。2, 147 n. 2, 147 23

Bennett, Lerone, 32, 36, 146 n. 2, 147 n. 23

贝内特,PS,146 n。8

Bennett, P. S., 146 n. 8

伯恩斯坦、巴顿,129、150 n。23

Bernstein, Barton, 129, 150 n. 23

比安卡罗萨,吉娜,145 n。5

Biancarosa, Gina, 145 n. 5

自由的诞生(桑德姆绘画),17、18、21、23

Birth of Liberty (Sandham painting), 17, 18, 21, 23

理查德·布莱克特,147 n。24

Blackett, Richard, 147 n. 24

黑人历史月,111

Black History Month, 111

黑色星期日(1935),85

Black Sunday (1935), 85

布莱尔,弗朗西斯·P.,147 n。14

Blair, Francis P., 147 n. 14

托马斯·布兰顿,127, 150 n。13

Blanton, Thomas, 127, 150 n. 13

布莱特,詹姆斯·G.,136, 150 n。19

Blight, James G., 136, 150 n. 19

保罗·邦尼菲尔德,149 n。24

Bonnifield, Paul, 149 n. 24

鲍斯,约翰·S.,149 n。13

Bowes, John S., 149 n. 13

布兰德,卡尔弗里蒙特,147 n。5

Brand, Carl Fremont, 147 n. 5

约翰·布兰福德,149 n。29

Branford, John, 149 n. 29

菲利普·布伦纳,128, 150 n。18

Brenner, Philip, 128, 150 n. 18

艾伦·布林克利,149 n。12

Brinkley, Alan, 149 n. 12

道格拉斯·布林克利,149 n。1

Brinkley, Douglas, 149 n. 1

布劳德诉盖尔案,108

Browder v. Gayle, 108

布朗,D.克莱顿,66, 67, 73, 148 n。3

Brown, D. Clayton, 66, 67, 73, 148 n. 3

布朗利,W.埃利奥特,148 n。30

Brownlee, W. Elliot, 148 n. 30

布莱恩·威廉·詹宁斯,50 岁

Bryan, William Jennings, 50

邦迪,麦克乔治,127, 150 n。15

Bundy, McGeorge, 127, 150 n. 15

伯克斯,玛丽·费尔,108

Burks, Mary Fair, 108

伯恩斯,斯图尔特,150 n。28

Burns, Stewart, 150 n. 28

乔治·W·布什,54 岁

Bush, George W., 54

海伦·坎贝尔,66 岁

Campbell, Helen, 66

坎图,D.,149 n。28, 150 n. 28, 150 10

Cantu, D., 149 n. 28, 150 n. 10

纽约卡内基公司,xii

Carnegie Corporation of New York, xii

罗伯特·卡罗,66, 75, 148 n。9

Caro, Robert, 66, 75, 148 n. 9

卡雷特罗,M.,147 n。31

Carretero, M., 147 n. 31

卡斯滕森,V.,148 n。13

Carstensen, V., 148 n. 13

漫画、社论、54、59、61–64

Cartoons, editorial, 54, 59, 61–64

菲德尔·卡斯特罗, 127, 142

Castro, Fidel, 127, 142

天主教移民,50–51, 53, 55, 58

Catholic immigrants, 50–51, 53, 55, 58

约翰·查普曼, 2, 6

Chapman, John, 2, 6

克里斯托弗·哥伦布和征服天堂(拍卖),49

Christopher Columbus and the Conquest of Paradise (Sale), 49

民权运动。参见罗莎·帕克斯/蒙哥马利巴士抵制小组

Civil Rights movement. See Rosa Parks/Montgomery Bus Boycott unit

内战,x,87-88。另请参阅上下文单元中的林肯

Civil War, x, 87–88. See also Lincoln in Context unit

克利夫兰,格罗弗,51

Cleveland, Grover, 51

冷战,126。另见古巴导弹危机单位

Cold War, 126. See also Cuban Missile Crisis unit

美国殖民地。参见列克星敦格林单位;波卡汉塔斯/约翰·史密斯救援队

Colonial America. See Lexington Green unit; Pocahantas/John Smith rescue unit

克里斯托弗·哥伦布,37, 49–64

Columbus, Christopher, 37, 49–64

哥伦布日/克里斯托弗·哥伦布单元,49–64

Columbus Day/Christopher Columbus unit, 49–64

简介和背景,49–52

introduction and background, 49–52

概览, xi

overview, xi

教学原因,52–53

reasons for teaching, 52–53

情景,53–54

scenarios, 53–54

来源和工具,55–64

sources and tools, 55–64

建议资源,64

suggested resources, 64

材料的使用,53–54

use of materials, 53–54

科尔文·克劳黛特,108

Colvin, Claudette, 108

丹尼尔·科尔韦尔,56 岁

Colwell, Daniel, 56

共同核心国家标准 (CCSS),x,143

Common Core State Standards (CCSS), x, 143

情境化

Contextualization

林肯在上下文单元,32–48

Lincoln in Context unit, 32–48

蒙哥马利公交车抵制的背景,107–109

Montgomery bus boycott in context, 107–109

x, 32, 37, 52 的性质

nature of, x, 32, 37, 52

库克、莫里斯,86、96、97

Cooke, Morris, 86, 96, 97

凯文·科斯特纳,128

Costner, Kevin, 128

科特,南希,148 n。24

Cott, Nancy, 148 n. 24

考恩,露丝·施瓦茨,66–68, 74, 148 n。5

Cowen, Ruth Schwartz, 66–68, 74, 148 n. 5

威廉克罗农,89, 104, 149 n。27

Cronon, William, 89, 104, 149 n. 27

古巴导弹危机小组,124–142

Cuban Missile Crisis unit, 124–142

简介和背景,124–128

introduction and background, 124–128

概览, xi

overview, xi

教学原因,128–129

reasons for teaching, 128–129

情景,129–130

scenarios, 129–130

来源和工具,131–141

sources and tools, 131–141

建议资源,142

suggested resources, 142

材料的使用,129–130

use of materials, 129–130

当前,理查德 N.,33, 146 n。9, 150 n. 150 3

Current, Richard N., 33, 146 n. 9, 150 n. 3

小达纳,RH,24 岁

Dana, R. H., Jr., 24

但丁,哈里斯 L.,150 n。3

Dante, Harris L., 150 n. 3

丹泽,杰拉德,149 n。11

Danzer, Gerald, 149 n. 11

戴维森,詹姆斯·W.,148 n。1

Davidson, James W., 148 n. 1

日、FB、106、113、114

Day, F. B., 106, 113, 114

查尔斯·迪恩,145 n。7

Deane, Charles, 145 n. 7

亚历山大·德孔德,150 n。3

DeConde, Alexander, 150 n. 3

德克斯特,FB,26

Dexter, F. B., 26

数字历史,64

Digital History, 64

布赖恩·R·德克,146 n。3–4, 147 n. 24, 147 n. 24, 147 29

Dirck, Brian R., 146 n. 3–4, 147 n. 24, 147 n. 29

特定领域的读写能力,x

Domain-specific literacy, x

发现日。参见哥伦布日/克里斯托弗·哥伦布单位

Discovery Day. See Columbus Day/Christopher Columbus unit

多勃雷宁,Anatoly F.,125–129、135、136、139、150 n。12, 150 n. 12, 150 16

Dobrynin, Anatoly F., 125–129, 135, 136, 139, 150 n. 12, 150 n. 16

唐纳德·大卫·赫伯特,33, 146 n。7

Donald, David Herbert, 33, 146 n. 7

多诺万,M.苏珊娜,149 n。29

Donovan, M. Suzanne, 149 n. 29

阿莫斯·杜立特,17–18, 20–21, 23

Doolittle, Amos, 17–18, 20–21, 23

雅各布·道格拉斯十二

Douglas, Jacob, xii

斯蒂芬·道格拉斯,x,32–35, 38, 40, 41

Douglas, Stephen A., x, 32–35, 38, 40, 41

道格拉斯,弗雷德里克,147 n。27

Douglass, Frederick, 147 n. 27

德雷涅,HE,149 n。30

Dregne, H. E., 149 n. 30

德鲁里,亨利·N.,150 n。8

Drewry, Henry N., 150 n. 8

尘暴,(受伤),88–89, 99

Dust Bowl, The (Hurt), 88–89, 99

尘暴历史,104

Dust Bowl History, 104

集尘碗装置,84–104

Dust Bowl unit, 84–104

介绍和背景,84–89

introduction and background, 84–89

概览, xi

overview, xi

教学原因,89–90

reasons for teaching, 89–90

来源和工具,92–103

sources and tools, 92–103

建议资源,104

suggested resources, 104

材料的使用,90–91

use of materials, 90–91

尘暴(最差),87–89, 98

Dust Bowl (Worster), 87–89, 98

托马斯·爱迪生,65–83

Edison, Thomas, 65–83

爱迪生与技术单位,65–83

Edison & Technology unit, 65–83

简介和背景,65–68

introduction and background, 65–68

概览, xi

overview, xi

教学原因,68–69

reasons for teaching, 68–69

场景,69–70

scenarios, 69–70

来源和工具,71–82

sources and tools, 71–82

建议资源,83

suggested resources, 83

材料的使用,69–70

use of materials, 69–70

社论漫画,54、59、61–64

Editorial cartoons, 54, 59, 61–64

蒂莫西·伊根,86, 148 n。14

Egan, Timothy, 86, 148 n. 14

艾森豪威尔,德怀特 D.,137

Eisenhower, Dwight D., 137

埃尔-巴兹,F.,149 n。30

El-Baz, F., 149 n. 30

艾默生,拉尔夫·沃尔多,20, 21

Emerson, Ralph Waldo, 20, 21

尤班克,温迪,十二

Ewbank, Wendy, xii

耕种沙尘暴(Svobida), 86, 95

Farming the Dust Bowl (Svobida), 86, 95

费伦巴赫,唐 E.,40, 41, 146 n。1, 146 n. 1, 146 9

Fehrenbacher, Don E., 40, 41, 146 n. 1, 146 n. 9

费拉罗,文森特,142

Ferraro, Vincent, 142

福戈,布拉德,十二

Fogo, Brad, xii

埃里克·福纳,34–36, 146–147 n。14, 147 n. 14, 147 22

Foner, Eric, 34–36, 146–147 n. 14, 147 n. 22

福特汉姆大学,83

Fordham University, 83

福尼尔,贾妮丝,147 n。31

Fournier, Janice, 147 n. 31

本杰明·富兰克林,20 岁

Franklin, Benjamin, 20

富兰克林和埃莉诺·罗斯福研究所,104

Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Institute, 104

弗雷德里克森,乔治·M.,147 n。20

Fredrickson, George M., 147 n. 20

自由民和南方社会项目,48

Freedmen and Southern Society Project, 48

约翰·C·弗里蒙特,37 岁

Fremont, John C., 37

托马斯·盖奇,27、31

Gage, Thomas, 27, 31

加德纳,LG,7

Gardiner, L. G., 7

加里森,威廉·劳埃德,33, 35

Garrison, William Lloyd, 33, 35

罗伯特·E·盖革,85 岁

Geiger, Robert E., 85

乔治梅森大学, 64, 70, 123, 141

George Mason University, 64, 70, 123, 141

乔治华盛顿大学,142

George Washington University, 142

吉尔德莱尔曼研究所,48

Gilder Lehrman Institute, 48

本杰明·吉特洛 ix

Gitlow, Benjamin, ix

弗雷德里克·W·格利奇,145–146 n。12

Gleach, Frederic W., 145–146 n. 12

古德温,多丽丝·卡恩斯,147 n。17 号

Goodwin, Doris Kearns, 147 n. 17

理查德·古德温, 129, 138

Goodwin, Richard, 129, 138

谷歌地图,65–66

Google Maps, 65–66

格雷厄姆,帕特里夏·阿尔比约,67, 148 n。24

Graham, Patricia Albjerg, 67, 148 n. 24

愤怒的葡萄,(斯坦贝克),84, 89–90, 91

Grapes of Wrath, The (Steinbeck), 84, 89–90, 91

格雷,弗雷德 D.,108

Gray, Fred D., 108

大不列颠。参见列克星敦格林单位

Great Britain. See Lexington Green unit

大萧条,87

Great Depression, 87

大平原干旱地区委员会,91, 96–97

Great Plains Drought Area Committee, 91, 96–97

大平原报告,88

Great Plains Report, 88

大盗贼(刘易斯),2

Great Rogue, The (Lewis), 2

霍勒斯·格里利,37 岁

Greeley, Horace, 37

格林布拉特,米里亚姆,149 n。13

Greenblatt, Miriam, 149 n. 13

绿色革命,90

Green Revolution, 90

格雷,宝琳·温克勒,85, 148 n。9

Grey, Pauline Winkler, 85, 148 n. 9

艾伦·C·盖尔佐,147 n。24

Guelzo, Allen C., 147 n. 24

格蒂,菲利普·M.,146 n。4

Guerty, Phillip M., 146 n. 4

切格瓦拉, 138, 142

Guevara, Che, 138, 142

伍迪·格思里,84、85、90

Guthrie, Woody, 84, 85, 90

古兹曼,凯文 RC,147 n。24

Gutzman, Kevin R. C., 147 n. 24

哈基姆,乔伊,149 n。7

Hakim, Joy, 149 n. 7

保罗·哈索尔,64, 83

Halsall, Paul, 64, 83

弗朗西斯·亚当斯·霍尔斯特德,63 岁

Halsted, Francis Adams, 63

拉尔夫·沃尔尼·哈洛,150 n。2

Harlow, Ralph Volney, 150 n. 2

《哈珀周刊》 , 54, 59

Harper’s Weekly, 54, 59

本杰明·哈里森,49–53, 55, 57, 64

Harrison, Benjamin, 49–53, 55, 57, 64

哈佛大学,83

Harvard University, 83

吉姆·哈斯金斯,106、149 n。1, 149 n. 1, 149 18–19

Haskins, Jim, 106, 149 n. 1, 149 n. 18–19

哈桑,MHA,149 n。30

Hassan, M. H. A., 149 n. 30

卡罗琳·亨德森,84–87, 91, 93, 94

Henderson, Caroline, 84–87, 91, 93, 94

亨利·帕特里克,105

Henry, Patrick, 105

威廉·赫恩登,33 岁

Herndon, William, 33

莱斯利·赫伦科尔,十二,145 n。6

Herrenkohl, Leslie, xii, 145 n. 6

历史思维问题项目,xii

Historical Thinking Matters Project, xii

历史很重要,70

History Matters, 70

列克星敦(芬尼)战役的历史,17–18

History of the Battle of Lexington (Phinney), 17–18

赫伯特·胡佛,87 岁

Hoover, Herbert, 87

霍顿,迈尔斯,106

Horton, Myles, 106

弗雷德·哈尔斯特兰德,104

Hulstrand, Fred, 104

大卫·亨特,37 岁

Hunter, David, 37

赫特,R.道格拉斯,88–89, 99, 148 n。5

Hurt, R. Douglas, 88–89, 99, 148 n. 5

工业革命,88

Industrial Revolution, 88

互联网现代史资料库,64

Internet Modern History Sourcebook, 64

雅各布森,马修·弗莱,147 n。4

Jacobson, Matthew Frye, 147 n. 4

詹姆斯一世,国王,4

James I, King, 4

詹姆斯敦殖民地。参见Pocahantas/John Smith 救援队

Jamestown colony. See Pocahantas/John Smith rescue unit

托马斯·杰斐逊,37 岁

Jefferson, Thomas, 37

种族隔离法,107–109, 111

Jim Crow laws, 107–109, 111

约翰逊,DW,147 n。32

Johnson, D. W., 147 n. 32

约翰逊,日内瓦,108

Johnson, Geneva, 108

约翰逊,林登 B.,66, 128–129

Johnson, Lyndon B., 66, 128–129

约翰逊,RT,147 n。32

Johnson, R. T., 147 n. 32

乔丹,温思罗普 D.,148 n。13

Jordan, Winthrop D., 148 n. 13

考夫曼,克里斯托弗·J.,147 n。7

Kauffman, Christopher J., 147 n. 7

凯,F.,148 n。13

Kaye, F., 148 n. 13

肯尼迪,约翰·F.

Kennedy, John F.

天主教, 53, 58

Catholicism of, 53, 58

古巴导弹危机,124–142

Cuban Missile Crisis, 124–142

罗伯特·肯尼迪,125–129、131、132、133–134、136、139、150 n。5–6

Kennedy, Robert F., 125–129, 131, 132, 133–134, 136, 139, 150 n. 5–6

肯尼迪总统图书馆和博物馆,142

Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum, 142

凯瑟琳凯查姆,149 n。17 号

Ketcham, Katherine, 149 n. 17

赫鲁晓夫,尼基塔,124–129, 135, 150 n。7

Khrushchev, Nikita, 124–129, 135, 150 n. 7

赫鲁晓夫,谢尔盖 N.,150 n。21

Khrushchev, Sergei N., 150 n. 21

赫鲁晓夫回忆录(赫鲁晓夫),125、135

Khrushchev Remembers (Khrushchev), 125, 135

小马丁·路德·金,49、109、118

King, Martin Luther, Jr., 49, 109, 118

克洛德阿尔瓦,J.豪尔赫,149 n。11

Klor de Alva, J. Jorge, 149 n. 11

无知运动, 50, 53, 58

Know-Nothing movement, 50, 53, 58

科库姆, 4

Kocoom, 4

赫伯特·科尔, 112, 116

Kohl, Herbert, 112, 116

克里格,拉里·S.,149 n。11

Krieger, Larry S., 149 n. 11

兰格,多萝西娅,84

Lange, Dorothea, 84

加里·拉尔森,54 岁

Larson, Gary, 54

拉斯罗普,WC 夫人,65–71、76–82、148 n。18

Lathrop, Mrs. W. C., 65–71, 76–82, 148 n. 18

理查德·内德·勒博,135, 150 n。12

Lebow, Richard Ned, 135, 150 n. 12

莱克,詹姆斯·N.,37, 147 n。29

Leiker, James N., 37, 147 n. 29

Lemay,JA Leo,2, 4, 10, 145 n。9

Lemay, J. A. Leo, 2, 4, 10, 145 n. 9

刘易斯,保罗,2, 11, 145 n。8

Lewis, Paul, 2, 11, 145 n. 8

列克星敦格林队,17–31

Lexington Green unit, 17–31

简介和背景,17–20

introduction and background, 17–20

概览, xi

overview, xi

教学原因,20-21

reasons for teaching, 20–21

情景,21–22

scenarios, 21–22

来源和工具,23–30

sources and tools, 23–30

建议资源,31

suggested resources, 31

材料的使用,21–22

use of materials, 21–22

列克星敦历史学会,31

Lexington Historical Society, 31

解放者,(报纸),33, 35

Liberator, The (newspaper), 33, 35

美国国会图书馆,第 31、48、64、83、104、123、149 n。20

Library of Congress, 31, 48, 64, 83, 104, 123, 149 n. 20

林肯,亚伯拉罕,ix,x,32-48,146 n。1, 146 n. 1, 146 5, 147 n. 5, 147 28

Lincoln, Abraham, ix, x, 32–48, 146 n. 1, 146 n. 5, 147 n. 28

林肯在上下文单元,32–48

Lincoln in Context unit, 32–48

简介和背景,32–37

introduction and background, 32–37

概览, xi

overview, xi

教学原因,37–38

reasons for teaching, 37–38

场景,38–39

scenarios, 38–39

来源和工具,33–37、40–48

sources and tools, 33–37, 40–48

建议资源,48

suggested resources, 48

材料的使用,38–39

use of materials, 38–39

林肯学院,48

Lincoln Institute, 48

无人知晓的林肯,(当前),33

Lincoln Nobody Knows, The (Current), 33

达纳琳达曼,141

Lindaman, Dana, 141

沃尔特·李普曼,128

Lippmann, Walter, 128

杰里米·利斯特, 22, 27

Lister, Jeremy, 22, 27

勒温,詹姆斯·W.,146 n。13

Loewen, James W., 146 n. 13

伊丽莎白·洛夫特斯,149 n。17 号

Loftus, Elizabeth, 149 n. 17

斯蒂芬·朗,148 n。3

Long, Stephen, 148 n. 3

洛坦,雷切尔,十二

Lotan, Rachel, xii

詹姆斯敦的爱与恨(价格),1

Love and Hate in Jamestown (Price), 1

大卫·洛文塔尔,146 n。20

Lowenthal, David, 146 n. 20

莱特尔,马克 H.,148 n。1

Lytle, Mark H., 148 n. 1

马林,詹姆斯·C.,149 n。25

Malin, James C., 149 n. 25

马丁,黛西,149 n。28, 150 n. 28, 150 10

Martin, Daisy, 149 n. 28, 150 n. 10

马萨诸塞州历史学会,18, 31

Massachusetts Historical Society, 18, 31

哈利·C·麦克迪恩,87, 148 n。13

McDean, Harry C., 87, 148 n. 13

杰西·F·麦克唐纳,52 岁

McDonald, Jesse F., 52

弗兰克·麦基,137

McGee, Frank, 137

麦吉夫尼,父亲,56 岁

McGivney, Father, 56

麦克弗森,詹姆斯,149 n。12

McPherson, James, 149 n. 12

迈耶,八月,150 n。30

Meier, August, 150 n. 30

斯蒂芬·明茨, 21, 64

Mintz, Stephen, 21, 64

民兵。参见列克星敦格林单位

Minutemen. See Lexington Green unit

米克森,DW,106、113、114

Mixon, D. W., 106, 113, 114

蒙特萨诺,昌西,149 n。4, 149 n. 4, 149 28, 150 n. 28, 150 10

Monte-Sano, Chauncey, 149 n. 4, 149 n. 28, 150 n. 10

蒙哥马利巴士抵制运动。参见罗莎·帕克斯/蒙哥马利巴士抵制小组

Montgomery Bus Boycott. See Rosa Parks/Montgomery Bus Boycott unit

蒙哥马利巴士抵制,(罗宾逊),117

Montgomery Bus Boycott, The (Robinson), 117

蒙哥马利市代码,112、120、149 n。22

Montgomery City Code, 112, 120, 149 n. 22

蒙哥马利进步协会 (MIA), 108–109, 118

Montgomery Improvement Association (MIA), 108–109, 118

莫里斯,奥尔登 D.,105, 149 n。8

Morris, Alden D., 105, 149 n. 8

莫尔斯,塞缪尔 FB,51

Morse, Samuel F. B., 51

摩西十二

Moses, xii

霍利奥克山学院,142

Mt. Holyoke College, 142

马伦,詹姆斯 T.,56 岁

Mullen, James T., 56

纳撒尼尔·马利肯,18–20、25、30、146 n。6

Mulliken, Nathaniel, 18–20, 25, 30, 146 n. 6

哈罗德·默多克,18, 146 n。3–4

Murdock, Harold, 18, 146 n. 3–4

托马斯·纳斯特,54, 59, 62–64

Nast, Thomas, 54, 59, 62–64

内森,詹姆斯 A.,150 n。23

Nathan, James A., 150 n. 23

国家档案馆,48

National Archives, 48

国家教育进步评估 (NAEP),ix

National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), ix

全国有色人种协进会 (NAACP),106

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), 106

国家学校历史中心,104

National Center for History in the Schools, 104

国家人文基金会,31, 83

National Endowment for the Humanities, 31, 83

全国州长协会,145 n。3–4

National Governors’ Association, 145 n. 3–4

国家历史教育信息交换所,141

National History Education Clearinghouse, 141

国家公园管理局,16, 31

National Park Service, 16, 31

国家公共广播电台,107

National Public Radio, 107

美国国家科学基金会 (NSF),xii

National Science Foundation (NSF), xii

国家安全档案馆,142

National Security Archive, 142

国家人文信托基金,31

National Trust for the Humanities, 31

国家妇女历史博物馆,83

National Women’s History Museum, 83

美洲原住民,波卡汉塔斯/约翰·史密斯救援队,1-16

Native Americans, Pocahantas/John Smith rescue unit, 1–16

纳特·特纳的叛乱,33

Nat Turner’s Rebellion, 33

尼尔里,林恩,150 n。27

Neary, Lynn, 150 n. 27

新政, 66, 87

New Deal, 66, 87

新政网络,104

New Deal Network, 104

理查德·尼克松,127, 129, 137

Nixon, Richard M., 127, 129, 137

诺伊斯,赫尔蒙·N.,150 n。2

Noyes, Hermon N., 150 n. 2

大卫·奈,66, 72, 147 n。2

Nye, David, 66, 72, 147 n. 2

奥康纳,托马斯 H.,150 n。8

O’Connor, Thomas H., 150 n. 8

肯尼·奥唐纳,128

O’Donnell, Kenny, 128

奥佩坎卡诺, 4

Opechancanough, 4

约翰·奥沙利文,2–3

O’Sullivan, John, 2–3

帕鲁丹,菲利普·肖,35, 147 n。19, 147 n. 19, 147 24

Paludan, Phillip Shaw, 35, 147 n. 19, 147 n. 24

约翰·帕克,17、25

Parker, John, 17, 25

帕克斯,罗莎,105–123, 149 n。1, 149 n. 1, 149 6, 149 n. 6, 149 8, 149 n. 8, 149 18–19

Parks, Rosa, 105–123, 149 n. 1, 149 n. 6, 149 n. 8, 149 n. 18–19

帕托瓦梅克,4

Patowameck, 4

美国人民史,A(Zinn),49

People’s History of the United States, A (Zinn), 49

珀西,乔治,145 n。11

Percy, George, 145 n. 11

埃利亚斯·芬尼,17-18,146 n。1

Phinney, Elias, 17–18, 146 n. 1

皮特凯恩, 约翰, 19, 26, 27, 31

Pitcairn, John, 19, 26, 27, 31

平原印第安人战争,88

Plains Indian Wars, 88

效忠誓言,52

Pledge of Allegiance, 52

普莱西诉弗格森案,107

Plessy v. Ferguson, 107

波卡汉塔斯和波瓦坦困境(汤森德),1

Pocahantas and the Powhatan Dilemma (Townsend), 1

风中奇缘(迪士尼电影)、1、5、6

Pocahantas (Disney film), 1, 5, 6

波卡汉塔斯/约翰·史密斯救援队,ix,1-16

Pocahantas/John Smith rescue unit, ix, 1–16

简介和背景,1–4

introduction and background, 1–4

概览, xi

overview, xi

教学原因,4-5

reasons for teaching, 4–5

场景,5–6

scenarios, 5–6

来源和工具,7-15

sources and tools, 7–15

建议资源,16

suggested resources, 16

事件时间表,12

timeline of events, 12

材料的使用,5-6

use of materials, 5–6

民粹主义,50

Populism, 50

波瓦坦, 2–4, 8, 9, 145 n. 6

Powhatan, 2–4, 8, 9, 145 n. 6

价格,大卫 A.,1,145 n。1

Price, David A., 1, 145 n. 1

通过历史和科学促进论证(PATHS),xii

Promoting Argumentation Through History and Science (PATHS), xii

加布里埃尔·普罗瑟,ix,145 n。2

Prosser, Gabriel, ix, 145 n. 2

公共广播系统 (PBS)、16、104、123

Public Broadcasting System (PBS), 16, 104, 123

昆比,Jan MG,146 n。1

Quimby, Jan M. G., 146 n. 1

黛安·拉维奇,145 n。8, 147 n. 8, 147 9

Ravitch, Diane, 145 n. 8, 147 n. 9

艾比·赖斯曼,xii,145 n。7

Reisman, Abby, xii, 145 n. 7

保罗·里维尔, 21, 105

Revere, Paul, 21, 105

革命战争。参见列克星敦格林单位

Revolutionary War. See Lexington Green unit

里普利,以斯拉,17-18,146 n。2

Ripley, Ezra, 17–18, 146 n. 2

罗宾逊,乔·安·吉布森,108–112、117、150 n。31

Robinson, Jo Ann Gibson, 108–112, 117, 150 n. 31

约翰·贝尔·罗宾逊,36, 38, 44, 117

Robinson, John Bell, 36, 38, 44, 117

罗比,帕梅拉,148 n。28

Roby, Pamela, 148 n. 28

罗杰斯,西德尼,107, 149 n。6

Rogers, Sidney, 107, 149 n. 6

约翰·罗尔夫,4

Rolfe, John, 4

托马斯·罗尔夫,4

Rolfe, Thomas, 4

富兰克林·德拉诺·罗斯福,52、85–87、96、97

Roosevelt, Franklin Delano, 52, 85–87, 96, 97

罗莎·帕克斯/蒙哥马利巴士抵制小组,105–123

Rosa Parks/Montgomery Bus Boycott unit, 105–123

简介和背景,105–111

introduction and background, 105–111

概览, xi

overview, xi

教学原因,111

reasons for teaching, 111

情景,111–112

scenarios, 111–112

来源和工具,113–122

sources and tools, 113–122

建议资源,123

suggested resources, 123

材料的使用,111–112

use of materials, 111–112

罗莎·帕克斯博物馆,123

Rosa Parks Museum, 123

朗特里,海伦·C.,3,4,146n。13, 146 n. 13, 146 19

Rountree, Helen C., 3, 4, 146 n. 13, 146 n. 19

艾略特·鲁德威克,150 n。30

Rudwick, Elliot, 150 n. 30

农村电气化。参见爱迪生与技术部门

Rural electrification. See Edison & Technology unit

农村电气化管理局 (REA), 66, 73, 86

Rural Electrification Administration (REA), 66, 73, 86

迪恩·腊斯克, 124–127, 132–134, 136

Rusk, Dean, 124–127, 132–134, 136

拉塞尔,CJ,72

Russell, C. J., 72

菲利普·拉塞尔,18–20, 25

Russell, Philip, 18–20, 25

塞尔,柯克帕特里克,49, 147 n。1

Sale, Kirkpatrick, 49, 147 n. 1

亨利·桑德姆,17, 18, 21, 23

Sandham, Henry, 17, 18, 21, 23

圣地亚哥州立大学,104

San Diego State University, 104

克莱门特·索特尔,146 n。6

Sawtell, Clement, 146 n. 6

托马斯·J·施勒雷斯 (Schlereth),51, 147 n。8

Schlereth, Thomas J., 51, 147 n. 8

杰克·施耐德,十二,49–64、124–142、147 n。2

Schneider, Jack, xii, 49–64, 124–142, 147 n. 2

斯科特·德雷德,33 岁

Scott, Dred, 33

大卫·塞尔夫,150 n。17 号

Self, David, 150 n. 17

她不会被感动(科尔),112, 116

She Would Not Be Moved (Kohl), 112, 116

希普,ER,150 n。32

Shipp, E. R., 150 n. 32

塞拉利昂殖民化,36、43

Sierra Leone colonization, 36, 43

史密斯,约翰,ix,1-16,145 n。4

Smith, John, ix, 1–16, 145 n. 4

斯诺,凯瑟琳·E.,145 n。5

Snow, Catherine E., 145 n. 5

所罗门,芭芭拉·米勒,67, 148 n。29

Solomon, Barbara Miller, 67, 148 n. 29

“再见,认识你真是太好了”(格思里歌曲),85、90

“So Long, It’s Been Good to Know Yuh” (Guthrie song), 85, 90

西奥多·索伦森,127, 128, 136

Sorenson, Theodore, 127, 128, 136

前苏联。参见古巴导弹危机小组

Soviet Union, former. See Cuban Missile Crisis unit

斯皮德,约书亚,35 岁

Speed, Joshua, 35

玛丽·斯皮德,35、42

Speed, Mary, 35, 42

斯坦福历史教育集团,xii,123

Stanford History Education Group, xii, 123

斯坦福大学教育学院,141

Stanford School of Education, 141

斯坦福大学教师教育计划 (STEP),xii

Stanford Teacher Education Program (STEP), xii

斯坦因,珍妮丝·格罗斯,135, 150 n。12

Stein, Janice Gross, 135, 150 n. 12

约翰·斯坦贝克,84, 89–90, 91, 148 n。1

Steinbeck, John, 84, 89–90, 91, 148 n. 1

塞缪尔·斯坦伯格,27,146 n。8

Steinberg, Samuel, 27, 146 n. 8

史蒂文斯,里德,xii,145 n。6

Stevens, Reed, xii, 145 n. 6

史蒂文森,珍妮特,105

Stevenson, Janet, 105

斯泰尔斯,以斯拉,19–22, 26, 146 n。9

Stiles, Ezra, 19–22, 26, 146 n. 9

哈里特·比彻·斯托,51 岁

Stowe, Harriet Beecher, 51

威廉·斯特雷奇,3 岁

Strachey, William, 3

苏珊·斯特拉瑟,66–68,148 n。6, 148 n. 6, 148 18

Strasser, Susan, 66–68, 148 n. 6, 148 n. 18

劳伦斯·斯沃比达,86–87, 91, 95

Svobida, Lawrence, 86–87, 91, 95

乔治·坦姆斯,150 n。1

Tames, George, 150 n. 1

罗杰·B·坦尼,37 岁

Taney, Roger B., 37

新时代教师计划,xii

Teachers for a New Era Project, xii

十三天(R·肯尼迪),125、127–128、131、136

Thirteen Days (R. Kennedy), 125, 127–128, 131, 136

第十三修正案,36

Thirteenth Amendment, 36

蒂尔顿,罗伯特·S.,4,145–146 n。12

Tilton, Robert S., 4, 145–146 n. 12

图特洛 (Arthur B.),18, 146 n. 5

Tourtellot, Arthur B., 18, 146 n. 5

汤森,卡米拉,1,3,4,145 n。3

Townsend, Camilla, 1, 3, 4, 145 n. 3

特洛伊大学,123

Troy University, 123

雷克斯福德·特格韦尔,86

Tugwell, Rexford, 86

特纳,阿尔文 O.,94, 148 n。3

Turner, Alvin O., 94, 148 n. 3

特纳,E.伦道夫,3, 146 n。15

Turner, E. Randolph, 3, 146 n. 15

特纳·弗雷德里克·杰克逊,50 岁

Turner, Frederick Jackson, 50

特威德,威廉“老板”,54, 63

Tweed, William “Boss,” 54, 63

联合国防治荒漠化公约,90

United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, 90

美国农业部 (USDA),66

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), 66

美国商务部气象局,149 n。5

U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Bureau, 149 n. 5

美国邮政服务,17, 23

U.S. Postal Service, 17, 23

马里兰大学,48

University of Maryland, 48

弗吉尼亚大学, 16, 66, 69, 76

University of Virginia, 16, 66, 69, 76

吴丹,124

U Thant, 124

范德帕斯,西蒙,4

Van de Passe, Simon, 4

范德普滕,伊丽莎白,十二

VanderPutten, Elizabeth, xii

威瑞森基金会,31

Verizon Foundation, 31

越南战争,124

Vietnam War, 124

弗吉尼亚理工大学,16

Virginia Tech, 16

沃斯,JF,147 n。31

Voss, J. F., 147 n. 31

韦德,路易斯·C.,150 n。4

Wade, Louise C., 150 n. 4

韦德,理查德·C.,150 n。4

Wade, Richard C., 150 n. 4

瓦洪苏纳科克,第 145 位 6

Wahunsunacock, 145 n. 6

亨利·华莱士,85, 86, 93, 94

Wallace, Henry A., 85, 86, 93, 94

华特迪士尼公司, 1, 2, 5, 6

Walt Disney Company, 1, 2, 5, 6

病房,JH,85、92

Ward, J. H., 85, 92

沃德,凯尔,14​​1

Ward, Kyle, 141

沃伦,W.,149 n。28, 150 n. 28, 150 10

Warren, W., 149 n. 28, 150 n. 10

詹姆斯·B·韦弗,51 岁

Weaver, James B., 51

韦尔奇,A.,136

Welch, A., 136

韦尔奇,大卫 A.,150 n。19

Welch, David A., 150 n. 19

白色,中提琴,108

White, Viola, 108

怀尔德,霍华德 B.,150 n。4

Wilder, Howard B., 150 n. 4

威尔斯,加里,34, 147 n。16

Wills, Garry, 34, 147 n. 16

威尔逊,道格拉斯 L.,33, 146 n。6

Wilson, Douglas L., 33, 146 n. 6

威尔逊,路易斯,149 n。11

Wilson, Louis, 149 n. 11

温堡,塞缪尔·S.,145 n。6, 146 n. 6, 146 10–11, 147 n. 2, 147 n. 2, 147 30–31, 149 n. 3–4, 149 n. 28, 150 n. 28, 150 10

Wineburg, Samuel S., 145 n. 6, 146 n. 10–11, 147 n. 2, 147 n. 30–31, 149 n. 3–4, 149 n. 28, 150 n. 10

爱德华·玛丽亚·温菲尔德,145 n。7

Wingfield, Edward Maria, 145 n. 7

凯蒂·温菲尔德,108

Wingfield, Katie, 108

南希沃洛赫,149 n。11

Woloch, Nancy, 149 n. 11

女人的家庭伴侣,70

Woman’s Home Companion, 70

妇女政治委员会(WPC),108

Women’s Political Council (WPC), 108

妇女的工作。参见爱迪生与技术部门

Womens’ work. See Edison & Technology unit

伍德维尔,路易斯,146 n。16

Woodville, Louise, 146 n. 16

伍斯特妇女历史项目,83

Worcester Women’s History Project, 83

唐纳德·沃斯特,84、87–89、98、104、148 n。2

Worster, Donald, 84, 87–89, 98, 104, 148 n. 2

值得,埃斯皮,108

Worthy, Espie, 108

旺德,JR,148 n。13

Wunder, J. R., 148 n. 13

耶鲁大学,142

Yale University, 142

菲利普·泽利科,150 n。19

Zelikow, Philip, 150 n. 19

霍华德·辛恩,49, 147 n。1

Zinn, Howard, 49, 147 n. 1

关于作者

About the Authors

萨姆·温伯格 (Sam Wineburg)是斯坦福大学玛格丽特·杰克斯教育学教授和(出于礼貌)历史学教授。温伯格领导斯坦福历史教育小组,该小组致力于改善历史教学 ( http://sheg.stanford.edu )。他的跨学科学术研究处于历史、认知科学和教育三个领域的十字路口,并曾在 C-SPAN、NPR 和 WBUR-Boston 以及全国各地的报纸(包括《纽约时报》)上进行专题报道华盛顿邮报和今日美国。他曾在布朗大学和伯克利分校接受教育,在获得博士学位之前曾在高中和初中任教。在斯坦福大学攻读教育心理学研究。2002 年,他的书《历史思维和其他非自然行为:描绘过去教学的未来》荣获美国学院和大学协会颁发的 Frederic W. Ness 奖,以表彰他对“改善通识教育”做出的最重要贡献。并了解文科。”

Sam Wineburg is the Margaret Jacks Professor of Education and (by courtesy) of History at Stanford University. Wineburg directs the Stanford History Education Group, a research and development effort aimed at improving history instruction (http://sheg.stanford.edu). His interdisciplinary scholarship sits at the crossroads of three fields: history, cognitive science, and education, and has been featured on C-SPAN, NPR, and WBUR-Boston, as well as in newspapers across the nation, including the New York Times, the Washington Post, and USA TODAY. Educated at Brown and Berkeley, he taught at the high school and middle school levels before completing his Ph.D. at Stanford in Psychological Studies in Education. In 2002 his book, Historical Thinking and Other Unnatural Acts: Charting the Future of Teaching the Past, won the Frederic W. Ness Award from the Association of American Colleges and Universities for work that makes the most important contribution to the “improvement of Liberal Education and understanding the Liberal Arts.”

黛西·马丁 (Daisy Martin)是国家历史教育信息中心 ( teachinghistory.org)的历史教育主任),由乔治梅森大学历史与新媒体中心制作的联邦政府资助项目。她曾是一名高中历史和公民教师,在加州大学圣克鲁斯分校和斯坦福大学任教职前教师,并在各种场所与资深教师合作,包括由美国历史教学资助计划、国家公园管理局资助的研讨会和国家人文基金会。马丁拥有密歇根大学、加州大学伯克利分校和斯坦福大学的学位,作为斯坦福历史教育小组的创始成员,她曾担任该小组的联合主任两年。她目前的项目包括与教师合作创建历史表现评估以及调查各州的历史/社会研究标准和评估系统。

Daisy Martin is the Director of History Education for the National History Education Clearinghouse (teachinghistory.org), a federally funded project produced by the Center for History and New Media at George Mason University. A former high school history and civics teacher, she teaches preservice teachers at the University of California at Santa Cruz and Stanford University and works with veteran teachers in a variety of venues, including workshops funded by the Teaching American History grant program, the National Parks Service, and the National Endowment for the Humanities. Martin holds degrees from the University of Michigan, UC Berkeley, and Stanford University, and as a founding member of the Stanford History Education Group she served as its co-director for 2 years. Her current projects include working with teachers to create history performance assessments and investigating states’ history/social studies standards and assessment systems.

昌西·蒙特·萨诺是密歇根大学教育研究副教授。她曾是一名高中教师和国家委员会认证教师,目前为历史课堂准备新手教师,并通过各种专业发展计划与当地学区的资深历史教师合作。她曾获得教育科学研究所和斯宾塞基金会的研究资助,以及国家社会研究委员会和美国教育研究协会的研究奖。作为斯坦福大学的研究生,她与温伯格和马丁一起是斯坦福历史教育小组的创始成员。她目前的研究重点是理解和培养学生基于证据的历史写作。她的奖学金出现在《美国教育研究杂志》《社会教育理论与研究》、《学习科学杂志》、《课程探究》和《教师教育杂志》

Chauncey Monte-Sano is Associate Professor of Educational Studies at the University of Michigan. A former high school teacher and National Board Certified teacher, she currently prepares novice teachers for the history classroom and works with veteran history teachers in local school districts through a variety of professional development programs. She has won research grants from the Institute of Education Sciences and the Spencer Foundation and research awards from the National Council for the Social Studies and the American Educational Research Association. As a graduate student at Stanford, she was a founding member of the Stanford History Education Group with Wineburg and Martin. Her current research focuses on understanding and developing students’ evidence-based historical writing. Her scholarship has appeared in the American Educational Research Journal, Theory and Research in Social Education, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, Curriculum Inquiry, and the Journal of Teacher Education.